^ 

^w 


n 


/ 


*^' 


.^ 


^v 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


1^  m 


■  50 

Hi 


I.I 


2.0 


11.25 


■WUb. 

J4 111^ 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


-^ 


// 


^  .^^^ 


-fs-'^, 


<J 


W/ 


33  WIST  MAIN  STRUT 

WHSTIR.N.Y.  14510 

(716)  •72-4503 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICIVIH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  bitstitut  canadien  de  microreproductions  historiques 


I 


-'1 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


n 


n 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommagde 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur^e  et/ou  pelliculde 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  gdographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 


I      I    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


D 


Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Relid  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  Mure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout^es 
tors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t^  fiim^es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl^mentaires; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  methods  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 


D 
D 
D 
D 
D 
Q 
D 
D 
D 
D 


Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagdes 

Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur6es  et/ou  pellicul6es 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  ddcolordes,  tachet6es  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ddtachdes 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Quality  in^gaie  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppl^mentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6X6  filmdes  6  nouveau  de  fa9on  6 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


I 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  i\\m6  au  taux  de  reduction  indiquA  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


/ 


12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


ils 

lu 

lifier 

ne 

age 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 


REGIS  COLLEGE  LIBRARY 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


L'exemplaire  filmd  fut  reproduit  grSce  d  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

I  REGIS  COLLEGE  LIBRARY 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettetd  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  ^^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprim6e  sont  filmds  en  commen^ant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmis  en  commen^ant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symbo'es  suivants  apparattra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ^  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
film6s  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  6tre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichd,  il  est  filmi  d  partir 
de  Tangle  supdrieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n6cessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mdthode. 


rata 
> 


elure. 


I 


3 


)2X 


1 

1. 

2 

3 

t  2  3 

4  5  6 


THE 


Vatican  Council 


^nb  xh  §zfxmixam : 


127 


PASTOEAL  LETTEE   TO  THE  OLEEGT, 


at 

HENRY    EDWARD, 
ARCHBISHOP  OF  WESTMINSTER. 

COLL  CHRISTI  RFGIS  SJ, 

Bid.  f;,/ij'jR 

TUHUNTO 


SECOND    EDITION.        t^JilJ^'ttL-V^ 


NEW    YORK: 
D.  &  J.  SADLIEK,  31    BARCLAY  STEEET. 

MONTREAL:   COB.   OF  NOTRE  DAME  AND  FRANCIS  XAVIER  STB. 

1871. 


f 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER   I. 

The  World  and  the  Council. 

External  history  of  the  Council,  8 ;  The  alleged  indifference 
to  the  Council,  19 ;  Internal  history,  30 ;  Protest  of  the  Cardinal 
Presidents,  39  ;  Definition  by  acclamation,  42  ;  Definitions 
binding  on  all  the  faithful,  45. 

CHAPTER  n. 

The  Two  Constitutions. 

Analysis  of  the  Constitution  De  Fide  Catholica,  49 ;  Pre- 
paration for  the  definition  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff,  57  ;  Analysis  of  the  First  Constitution  on  the  Church 
of  Christ,  60  ;  Six  points  of  the  definition  of  Infallibility,  63. 

I.  Meaning  of  the  phrase  loqui  ex  cathedra^  64. 

II.  Faith  and  morals  the  object  of  Infallibility,  65 ;  Fiye 
points  of  the  Charter  of  the  Church:  1.  The  perpetuity  and 
universality  of  the  mission  of  the  Church  as  a  teacher  of  man- 
kind. 2.  The  Deposit  of  the  Divine  Faith  and  Law  entrusted  to 
the  Church.  3.  The  Church  the  solo  interpreter  of  the  Faith 
and  of  the  Law.  4.  The  Church  the  sole  Divine  Judge  over  the 
reason  and  will  of  man.  5.  The  Perpetual  Presence  of  ouf 
Lord  with  the  Church,  65.  The  doctrinal  authority  of  the 
Church  not  confined  to  matters  of  revelation,  73  ;  Truths  of 
Science,  74  ;  Truths  of  History,  74 ;  Dogmatic  Facts,  75,  76 ; 
Minor  censures,  79. 

(8) 


L  CONTENTS. 

III.  The  efficient  cause  of  InfallibiUty,  85 ;  Witness  of  St. 
Ambrose,  a.  d.  397,  85 ;  Witness  of  St.  John  Chrysostom,  A.  d. 
407,  86 ;  Witness  of  St.  Augustine,  A.  d.  430,  86 ;  Witness  of 
St.  Cyril,  A.  D.  444,  86 ;  Witness  of  St.  Leo,  a.  d.  460,  87 ;  Wit- 
ness of  St.  Gelasius,  a.  d.  496,  87 ;  Witness  of  Pelagius  II., 

A.D.  590,  88;  Witness  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  a.d.  604, 
88 ;  Witness  of  Stephanus  Dorensis,  a.  d.  649,  89 ;  Witness  of 
St.  Vitalian,  a.  d.  669,  89. 

IV.  The  Ads  to  which  the  divine  assistance  is  attached,  93. 
v.  The  extension  of  the  Infallible  authority  to  the  limits 

of  the  doctrinal  office  of  the  Church,  96. 
VI.  The  dogmatic  value  of  Pontifical  acts  ex  cathedrd,  97. 


H 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Terminology  of  the  Doctrine  of  Infallibility. 

Personal,  100,  119;  Independent,  103,  119;  Separate,  104, 
119;  Absolute,  108,  119. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Scientific  History  of  the  Catholic  Bide  of  Faith. 

Evidence  of  history,  and  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff,  120 ;  Cumulus  of  evidence  for  the  Infallibility  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff  undiminished  by  historical  doubts,  123 ; 
Difficulties  of  human  history,  125 ;  German  Bishops  at  Fulda, 
125  ;  Heretical  assumptions  of '  scientific  history,'  132 ;  History 
improperly  called  a  science,  137  ;  Definition  of  science,  137  ; 
Theology  only  improprie  a  science,  140 ;  Modern  Gnosticism, 
141. 

CHAPTER  V. 

Besult  of  the  Definition. 

Bishops  witnesses  of  the  objective  faith  of  the  Church,  145; 
Tradition  of  England,  146 ;  Sir  Thomas  More,  147  ;  Cardinal 
Fisher,  148 ;  Cardinal  Pole,  148 ;  Harding,  149 ;  Campian,  149 ; 
Nicholas  Sanders,  151 ;  Kellison,  153 ;  Southwell,  153  ;  Albau 
Butler,  154 ;  Charles  Plowden,  155  ;  Bishop  Hay,  157  ;  Bishop 
Mihier,  157 ;  Predicted  disasters  from  the  Definition,  158. 


I 


i 


CONTENTS. 


J 


APPENDIX. 

I.  The  Latin  Postulatum  of  the  Bishops  of  the  Definition 

of  the  Infallibility,   169;  English  Translation  of  the 
same,  174, 

II.  Letter  of  H.  E.  Cardinal  Antonelli  to  Count  Daru,  181. 
III.  Protests  of  Cardinal  Presidents,  191. 

IV.  Constitutio  De  Fide  Catholica,  192;  Translation  of 
the  same,  206 ;  Constitutio  Dogmatica  Prima  de  Ec- 
clesia  Christi,  221 ;  Translation  of  the  same,  230. 

v.  Rules  laid  down  by  Theologians  for  Doctrinal  Defini- 
tions, 240. 

VI.  The  Case  of  Honorius ;  Note  of  the  Archbishop  of 
Baltimore  on  the  question  of  Honorius,  244. 

VII.  Letters  of  the  German  Bishops  on  the  Council,  247. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL 


AND 


P\ 


ITS    DEFINITIONS. 


CHAPTER   I. 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


Keverend  and  Dear  Brethren. 

From  the  opening  of  the  Council  until  the 
close  of  the  Fourth  Public  Session,  when  leave  was 
given  to  the  Bishops  to  return  for  a  time  to  their 
flocks,  I  thought  it  my  duty  to  keep  silent.  It  was 
not  indeed  easy  to  refrain  from  contradicting  the 
manifold  errors  and  falsehoods  by  which  the  Coun- 
cil has  been  assailed.  But  it  seemed  for  many  rea- 
sons to  be  a  higher  duty,  to  wait  until  the  work  in 
which  we  were  engaged  should  be  accomplished. 
That  time  is  now  happily  come ;  and  the  obligation 
which  would  have  hitherto  forbidden  the  utterance 
of  much  that  I  might  have  desired  to  say,  has  been 
by  supreme  authority  removed. 

To  you,  therefore.  Reverend  and  dear  Brethren, 
I  at  once  proceed  to  make  known  in  mere  outline 
the  chief  events  of  this  first  period  of  the  Council 
of  the  Vatican. 

I  shall  confine  what  I  have  to  say  to  the  three 

(7) 


8 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


I- 


following  heads : — First,  to  a  narrative  of  certain 
facts  external  to  the  Council,  but  affecting  the  esti- 
mate of  its  character  and  acts ;  secondly,  to  an  ap- 
preciation of  the  internal  spirit  and  action  of  the 
Council ;  and  thirdly,  to  a  brief  statement  of  the 
two  dogmatic  Constitutions  published  in  its  third 
and  fourth  Sessions. 

First,  as  to  the  external  history  of  the  Council. 
As  yet,  no  narrative,  or  official  account  of  its  pro- 
ceedings, has  been  possible.      The  whole  world, 
Catholic  and  Protestant,  has  been  therefore  com- 
pelled to  depend  chiefly  upon  newspapers.     And 
as  these  powerfully  preoccupy  and  prejudice  the 
minds  of  men,  I  thought  it  my  duty,  during  the 
eight  months  in  which  I  was  a  close  and  constant 
witness  of  the  procedure  and  acts  of  the  Council, 
to  keep  pace  with  the  histories  and  representations 
made  by  the  press  in  Italy,  Germany,  France,  and 
England.    This,  by  the  watchful  care  of  others  in 
England  and  in  Rome,  I  was  enabled  to  do.     In 
answer  to  an  inquiry  from  this  country  as  to  what 
was  to  be  beheved  respecting  the  Council,  I  con- 
sidered it  my  duty  to  reply  :  "  Read  carefully  the 
correspondence  from  Rome  published  in  England, 
believe  the  reverse,  and  you  will  not  be  far  from  the 
truth."     I  am  sorry  to  be  compelled  to  say  that 
this  is,  above  all,  true  of  our  own  journals.    Wheth- 
er the  amusing  blunders  and  persistent  misrepre- 
sentations were  to  be  charged  to  the  account  of  ill 
will,  or  of  want  of  common  knowledge,  it  was  often 
not  easy  to  say.     Two  things,  however,  were  ob- 
vious.    The  journals  of  Catholic  countries,  per- 
verse and  hostile  as  they  might  be,  rarely  if  ever 
made  themselves  ridiculous.     They  wrote  with 


' 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL.  9 

great  bitterness  and  animosity :  but  with  a  point 
which  showed  that  they  understood  what  they 
were  perverting ;  and  that  they  had  obtained  their 
knowledge  from  sources  which  could  only  have 
been  opened  to  them  by  violation  of  duty.  Their 
narratives  of  events  which  were  passing  under  my 
own  eyes,  day  by  day,  were  so  near  the  truth,  and 
yet  so  far  from  it,  so  literally  accurate,  but  so  abso- 
lutely false,  that  for  the  first  time  I  learned  to  un- 
derstand Paolo  Sarpi's  "  History  of  the  Council  of 
Trent ;"  and  foresaw  how,  perhaps  from  among 
nominal  Catholics,  another  Paolo  Sarpi  will  arise 
to  write  the  History  of  the  Council  of  the  Vatican. 
But  none  of  this  applies  to  our  own  country.  I  am 
the  less  disposed  to  charge  these  misrepresenta- 
tions, in  the  case  of  English  correspondents,  to  the 
account  of  ill  will,  though  they  abundantly  showed 
the  inborn  animosity  of  an  anti-Catholic  tradition, 
because  neither  correspondents  nor  journalists  ever 
willingly  expose  themselves  to  be  laughed  at.  I 
therefore  put  it  down  to  the  obvious  reason  that 
when  English  Protestants  undertake  to  write  of  an 
CEcumenical  Council  of  the  Catholic  Church,  noth- 
ing less  than  a  miracle  could  preserve  them  from 
making  themselves  ridiculous.  This,  I  am  sorry 
to  know,  for  the  fair  name  of  our  country,  has  been 
the  effect  produced  by  English  newspapers  upon 
foreign  countries.  Latterly,  however,  they  seemed 
to  have  learned  prudence,  and  to  have  relied  no 
longer  on  correspondents  who,  hardly  knowing  the 
name,  nature,  use,  or  purpose  of  anything  about 
which  they  had  to  ./rite,  were  at  the  mercy  of  such 
informants  as  English  travelers  meet  at  a  table- 
d'hote  in  Rome.  Then  appeared  paragraphs  with- 
i* 


If 


^;. 


lO  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

out  date  or  place,  duly  translated,  as  we  discovered 
by  comparing  them,  from  Italian  and  German 
newspapers.  They  were  less  amusing,  but  they 
were  even  more  misleading.  By  way  of  preface,  I 
will  give  the  estimate  of  two  distinguished  Bish- 
ops, who  are  beyond  suspicion,  as  to  the  truthful- 
ness of  one  notorious  journal. 

Of  all  the  foreign  sources  from  which  the  Eng- 
lish newspapers  drew  their  inspiration,  the  chief, 
perhaps,  was  the  "  Augsburg  Gazette."  This  paper 
has  many  titles  to  special  consideration.  The  in- 
famous matter  of  Janus  first  appeared  in  it  under 
the  form  of  articles.  During  the  Council,  it  had  in 
Rome  at  least  one  English  contributor.  Its  letters 
on  the  Council  have  been  translated  into  English 
and  published  by  a  Protestant  bookseller,  in  a  vol- 
ume by  Quirinus. 

I  refrain  from  giving  my  own  estimate  of  the 
book,  until  I  have  first  given  the  judgment  of  a 
distinguished  Bishop  of  Germany,  one  of  the  mi- 
nority opposed  to  the  definition,  whose  cause  the 
"  Augsburg  Gazette"  professed  to  serve. 

Bishop  Von  Ketteler,  of  Mayence,  publicly  pro- 
tested against  "the  systematic  dishonesty  of  the 
correspondent  of  the  'Augsburg  Gazette.'"  "It 
is  a  pure  invention,"  he  adds,  "  that  the  Bishops 
named  in  that  journal  declared  that  DoUinger  rep- 
resented, as  to  the  substance  of  the  question  (of  in- 
fallibility), the  opinions  of  a  majority  of  the  German 
Bishops."  And  this,  he  said,  "  is  not  an  isolated " 
error,  but  part  of  a  system  which  consists  in  the 
daring  attempt  to  publish  false  news,  with  the  ob- 
ject of  deceiving  the  German  public,  according  to 
a  plan  concerted  beforehand." "It  will  be 


THE  WORLD  AND   THE   COUNCIL. 


II 


y 


necessary  one  day  to  expose  in  all  their  nakedness 
and  abject  mendacity  the  articles  of  the  '  Augs- 
burg Gazette.'  They  will  present  a  formidable 
and  lasting  testimony  to  the  extent  of  injustice  of 
which  party  men,  who  affect  the  semblance  of  su- 
perior education,  have  been  guilty  agains^  the 
Church."'^  Again,  at  a  later  date,  the  Bishop  of 
Mayence  found  it  necessary  to  address  to  his  Dio- 
cese another  public  protest  against  the  inventions 
of  the  "  Augsburg  Gazette,"  "  The  *  Augsburg 
Gazette,'"  he  says,  "hardly  ever  pronounces  my 
name  without  appending  to  it  a  falsehood."  '*  It 
would  have  been  easy  for  us  to  prove  that  every 
Roman  letter  of  the  '  Augsburg  Gazette'  contains 
gross  perversions  and  untruths.  Whoever  is  con- 
versant with  the  state  of  things  here,  and  reads 
these  letters,  cannot  doubt  an  instant  that  these 
errors  are  voluntary,  and  are  part  of  a  concerted 
system  designed  to  deceive  the  public.  If  time 
fails  me  to  correct  publicly  this  uninterrupted  se- 
ries of  falsehoods,  it  is  impossible  for  me  to  keep 
silence  when  an  attempt  is  made,  with  so  much 
perfidy,  to  misrepresent  my  own  convictions."  f 

*  The  Vatican,  March  4, 1870,  p.  145. 

f  The  Vatican,  June  17,  1870,  p.  319.  "  The  Archbishop  of  Co- 
logne has  condemned  a  pretended  Catholic  Journal  in  which  the 
dogma  of  the  Infallibility  is  attacked,  and  the  ]iroceeding8  of  the 
Council  misrepresented  and  vilified.  Tlio  sentence  of  the  Arch- 
bishop on  this  matter  derives  the  greater  weight  from  the  fact  of 
his  having,  as  he  statea,  formed  part  of  the  minority  in  the  memo- 
rable vote  of  July  13.  The  Archbishop  says  :  '  The  clergy  of  this 
Diocese  are  aware  that  a  weekly  paper,  the  "  llheinischer  Mcrkur," 
constantly  attacks,  in  an  odious  manner,  and  with  ignoWo  weapons, 
the  Holy  Church,  in  tlie  person  of  its  lawful  chiefs  the  Pope  and 
the  Bishops,  and  in  its  highest  representative  the  (Ecumenical 
Council  i  BO  that  men's  minds  are  disturbed,  and  the  hearts  of  the 


12 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Again,  Bishop  Hefele,  commenting  on  the  Ro- 
man correspondents  of  the  ''Augsburg  Gazette" 
says :  "  It  is  evident  that  there  are  people,  not 
Bishops,  but  having  rehitions  with  the  Council, 
who  are  not  restrained  by  duty  and  conscience."  * 

faithful  alienated  from  the  Church.  It  also  o|)enly  advocates  the 
abolition,  by  the  secular  authority,  of  the  Church's  liberty  and  in- 
dependence. I  therefore  hold  it  to  be  my  duty,  in  discharge  of  my 
pastoral  office,  to  expose  the  anti-Catholic  character  of  the  said  pa- 
per ;  not  because  I  regard  it  as  of  any  greater  importance  than 
those  other  more  noisy  organs  of  the  press  which  arc  the  exponents 
of  hatred  against  religion,  but  simi)ly  because  the  paper  above- 
named  pretends  to  be  Catholic.  It  is  on  that  account  that,  as  Cath- 
olic Bishop  of  this  city,  I  feel  called  upon  to  denounce  the  falsehood 
of  the  assumption  of  the  name  of  Catholic  by  a  journal  which  is 
laboring  to  overthrow  the  unity  of  the  Church  by  separating  Cath- 
olics from  that  rock  on  which  she  is  founded.  •This  declaration  is 
also  due  from  me  to  those  my  Right  Reverend  Brethren  in  tho 
Episcopate  who  belonged  with  me  to  the  minority  in  the  Council. 
The  journal  in  question  assumes  to  bo  the  exponent  of  the  senti- 
ments of  that  minority,  but  it  never  was  in  any  way,  directly  or  in- 
directly, recognized  by  it  or  any  of  its  members ;  it  has  been,  on 
the  contrary,  repeatedly  blamed  and  denounced.  Wherefore  I  ex- 
hort all  the  Reverend  Clergy  of  the  Archdiocese  to  be  mindful  of 
their  duty  as  sons  of  the  Catholic  Church  ;  and  not  countenance  in 
any  way  whatsoever,  either  by  taking  it  in  or  reading  it,  the  jour- 
nal above-named,  which  outrages  our  holy  Mother,  rejects  lior  au- 
thority, and  desires  to  see  her  enslaved,  I  also  exhort  you  on  all 
fitting  occasions  to  warn  your  flocks  of  tho  dangerous  and  anti 
Catholic  character  of  that  journal,  so  that  they  may  be  dissuaded 
from  buying  or  reading  i^  and  may  escape  being  deluded  by  its 
errors,  I  had  resolve  1  to  order  an  instruction  to  bo  given  from  the 
pulpit  upon  tho  more  recent  decisions  of  the  Council,  and  esj^ecially 
upon  the  infallible  teaching  of  tho  Pope,  and  to  explain  therein  the 
true  sense  of  the  dogma;  and  thus  to  remove  tho  prejudices  that 
have  been  raised  against  it,  as  if  it  were  a  novel  doctrine  or  one  in 
contradiction  to  tho  end  of  the  Churr'  's  constitution,  or  to  sound 
reason  ;  and  to  meet  generally  tho  objections  raised  aj/'ainst  the 
validity  of  the  Council's  decision,'  " 

•  The  Vatican,  March  4, 1870,  p.  145. 


If 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


13 


We  had  reason  to  believe  that  the  names  of  these 
people,  both  German  and  English,  were  well  known 
to  us. 

Now  the  testimony  of  the  Bishop  of  Mayence,  as 
to  the  falsehoods  of  these  correspondents  respect- 
ing Rome  and  Germany,  I  can  confirm  by  my  tes- 
timony as  to  their  treatment  of  matters  relating  to 
Rome  and  England.  I  do  not  think  there  is  a 
mention  of  my  own  name  without,  as  the  Bishop 
of  Mayence  says,  the  appendage  of  a  falsehood. 
The  whole  tissue  of  the  correspondence  is  false. 
Even  the  truths  it  narrates  are  falsified ;  and 
through  this  discolored  medium  the  English  peo- 
ple, by  the  help  of  Quirinus  and  the  "  Saturday 
Review,"  gaze  and  are  misled. 

To  relieve  this  graver  aspect  of  the  subject,  I 
will  add  a  few  livelier  exploits  of  our  English  cor- 
respondents. On  January  14,  an  English  journal 
announced  that  the  Bishops  were  unable  to  speak 
Latin ;  and  that  Cardinal  Altieri  (who  laid  down 
his  life  for  his  flock  m  the  cholera  three  years  ago), 
in  whose  rooms  the  Bishops  met,  '*  was  beside  him- 
self." "  What  is  there,"  the  correspondent  of  an- 
other paper  asked,  '*  in  seven  hundred  old  men 
dressed  in  white,  and  wearing  tall  paper  caps?" 
"  The  Oriental  Bishops,"  he  says,  "  refused  to  wear 
white  mitres :"  reasonably,  because  they  never 
wear  them.  "  The  Bishop  of  Thun  attacked  the 
Bishop  of  Sura  with  a  violence  which  threatened 
personal  collision."  There  is  no  Bishop  of  Thun. 
The  same  paper,  July  7,  says,  "  I  was  positively 
shocked,  yesterday,  at  finding  that  the  Roman 
Catholic  Hierarchy  of  my  own  country  is  a  sham  ; 
at  least,  so  far  as  regards  its  territorial  and  inde- 


14 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


pendent  pretensions.  Every  one  of  them,  includ- 
ing the  Archbishop,  is  in  charge  of  a  Vicar  Apos- 
toHc,  Cardinal  Maddalena,  titular  Archbishop  of 
Corfu,  within  whose  diocese,  it  would  appear,  our 
island  is  situated."  This  has  more  foundation  in 
fact  than  the  other  statements,  for  until  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Corfu  could  find  a  carriage,  we  used  daily 
to  go  together  to  the  Council. 

A  leading  journal,  in  May  last,  announced  :  "At 
a  recent  sitting  of  the  Council,  Cardinal  Schwar- 
zenberg  made  a  speech  which  created  even  a  great- 
er uproar  than  the  former  one  of  Bishop  Stross- 
mayer."  In  this  speech  he  defended  Protestants 
with  such  vigor  that  "  the  presiding  Legate,  Car- 
dinal De  Angelis,  interrupted  the  speaker,  and  a 
warm  dispute  between  the  two  Cardinals  ensued. 
The  President  strove  repeatedly,  but  in  vain,  to 
silence  the  Cardinal  with  his  bell ;  and  at  length 
the  Bishops  drowned  his  protest  in  a  storm  of 
hisses,  in  the  midst  of  which  the  Cardinal  was  car- 
ried from  the  tribune,  half  fainting  with  excite- 
ment, to  his  seat."  The  Cardinal  was  indeed  called 
to  order,  but  no  such  tragedy  was  ever  acted. 
"The  Papal  authorities,"  says  another  journal, 
"  have  housed  the  Bishops  with  discriminating  hos- 
pitality. Those  who  could  not  be  absolutely  trust- 
ed have  been  lodged  with  safe  companions,  in  the 
proportion  of  one  weak  brother  to  half-a-dozen 
strong."  "  The  Jesuits  have  had  the  manipulation 
of  the  flock  and  have  done  it  well."  The  distribu- 
tion of  the  Bishops  was  made  by  the  Government, 
and  months  before  the  Council  opened,  with  as 
much  theological  manipulation  as  the  filling  of  a 
train  from  Paddington.    Again,  we  hear  on  May 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


15 


17,  that  "  Cardinal  Bilio,  the  Prefect  of  the  Depu- 
tation for  Dogma,  and  author  of  the  Syllabus,  has 
passed  over  to  the  opposition."  When  the  Holy 
Father  heard  of  this  defection  "  he  was  seized  with 
faintness,"  and  told  the  Cardinal  ''to  go  on  a  tour 
for  the  benefit  of  his  health."  The  "  Times"  at  last 
confessed :  "  To  find  out  the  truth  of  what  is  going 

on is   difficult  beyond  conception." 

"  Every  day,  even  every  hour,  brings  up  its  story, 

which,  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  will  prove  an 

ingenious  hoax."  Therefore  nine-tenths  of  these 
histories  are  labelled  "  hoaxes."  The  "  Times" 
adds :  "  To  pick  one's  way  amidst  these  snares, 
without  becoming  the  victims  of  delusions,  is  what 
no  man  can  feel  quite  sure  of."  A  warning  of 
which  I  hope  the  readers  of  newspapers  will  fully 
avail  themselves. 

The  "  Standard,"  wiser  than  its  fellows,  said  in 
February  :  **  It  is  a  thousand  pities  that  English 
correspondents  should  childishly  swallow  cock- 
and-bull  stories  of  what  never  did  and  never  could 
have  occurred  in  the  Council,  and  thus  damage 
their  own  reputation  for  accuracy,  as  well  as  infer- 
entially  that  of  their  colleagues." 

Another  journal  damaged  something  more  than 
its  reputation  for  accuracy,  when,  after  having  an- 
nounced that  the  Roman  Clergy,  that  is,  the  Parish 
Priests  of  Rome,  had,  all  but  eight,  declined  to 
petition  in  favor  of  the  definition,  it  was  again  and 
'again  called  upon  to  publish  the  fact  that  the  Ro- 
man Clergy  unanimously  petitioned  for  the  defini- 
tion, in  a  form  so  explicit  that  the  Clergy  of 
England  and  Scotland  afterwards  adopted  it  as 
their  own,  and  presented  it  to  the  Holy  Father. 


i6 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


li 


The  newspaper  in  question  was  never  pleased  to 
nsert  the  correction. 

But  these  are  flowers  plucked  at  random. 

I  will  now  endeavor  to  give  shortly  a  more  con- 
nected outline  of  the  Vatican  Council,  as  drawn  by 
the  newspapers  of  the  last  eight  or  nine  months  ; 
and  as  their  representations  will  be  one  day  read 
up  as  contemporaneous  records  for  a  future  his- 
tory, I  wish  to  leave  in  the  Archives  of  the  Diocese 
a  contemporaneous  record  of  their  utter  worth- 
lessness,  and,  for  the  most  part,  of  their  utter  false- 
hood. 

As  the  highest  point  attracts  the  storm,  so  the 
chief  violence  fell  upon  the  head  of  the  Vicar  of 
Jesus  Christ.  On  this  I  shall  say  nothing.  Pos- 
terity will  know  Pius  the  Ninth  ;  and  the  world 
already  knows  him  now  too  well  to  remember, 
except  with  sorrow  and  disgust,  the  language  of 
his  enemies.  "  If  they  have  called  the  master  of 
the  house  Beelzebub,  how  much  more  them  of  his 
household  ? "  No  one  has  this  privilege  above  the 
Vicar  of  the  Master ;  and  it  is  a  great  joy  and  dis- 
tinct source  of  strength  and  confidence  to  all  of 
the  household  to  share  this  sign,  which  never  fails 
to  mark  those  who  are  on  His  side  against  the 
world. 

The  Council  was  composed,  at  first,  of  y6y  Fa- 
thers. We  were  told  that  their  very  faces  were 
such  as  in  compel  an  enlightened  correspondent, 
at  the  first  sight  of  them,  to  lament  "  that  the  spir- 
itual welfare  of  the  world  should  be  committed  to 
such  men." 

Then,  by  a  wonderful  disposition  of  things,  for 
the  good,  no  doubt,  of  the  human  race,  and,  above 


THE  WORLD   AND   THE   COUNCIL. 


17 


all,  oi  the  Church  itself,  the  Council  was  divided 
into  a  majority  and  a  minority  ;  and,  by  an  even 
more  beneficent  and  admirable  provision,  it  was  so 
ordered  that  the  theology,  philosophy,  science, 
culture,  intellectual  power,  logical  acumen,  elo- 
quence, candor,  nobleness  of  mind,  independence 
of  spirit,  courage,  and  elevation  of  character  in 
the  Council,  were  all  to  be  found  in  the  minority. 
The  majority  was  naturally  a  Dead  Sea  of  supersti- 
tion, narrovness,  shallowness,  ignorance,  prejudice ; 
without  theology,  philosoph}^  science,  or  elo- 
quence ;  gathered  from  "  old  Catholic  countries  ;  " 
bigoted,  tyrannical,  deaf  to  reason ;  with  a  herd 
of  "  Curial  and  Italian  Prelates,"  and  mere  "  Vicars 
Apostolic." 

The  Cardinal  Presidents  were  men  of  imperious 
and  overbearing  character,  who  by  violent  ringing 
of  bells  and  intemperate  interruptions  cut  short 
the  calm  and  inexorable  logic  of  the  minority. 

But  the  conduct  of  the  majority  was  still  more 
overbearing.  By  violent  outcries,  menacing  ges- 
tures, and  clamorous  manifestations  round  the 
tribune,  they  drowned  the  thrilling  eloquence  of 
the  minority,  and  compelled  unanswerable  orators 
to  descend.  \ 

Not  satisfied  with  this,  the  majority,  under  the 
pretext  that  the  method  of  conducting  the  discus- 
sions was  imperfect,  obtained  from  the  supreme 
authority  a  new  regulation,  by  which  all  liberty  of 
discussion  was  finally  taken  from  the  noble  few 
who  were  struggling  to  redeem  the  Council  and 
the  Church  from  bondage. 

From  that  date  the  non-oecumenicity  of  the 
Council  was  no  longer  doubtful.    Indeed,  "  Janus  " 


i8 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


■t 


\ 


had  told  the  world  in  many  tongues,  long  before  it 
met,  that  the  Council  would  not  be  free.  Never- 
theless, the  minority  persevered  with  heroi;^  cour- 
age, logic  which  nothing  could  resist,  2nd  elo- 
quence which  electrified  the  most  insensible,  until 
a  tyrannous  majority,  deaf  to  reason  and  incapable 
of  argument,  cut  discussion  short  by  ar  arbitrary 
exercise  of  power  ;  and  so  silenced  the  only  voices 
nobly  lifted  up  for  science,  candor  aixi  common 
sense. 

This  done,  the  definition  of  new  dogmas  became 
inevitable  and  the  antagonism  between  the  ultra- 
romanism  of  a  party  and  the  progress  of  modern 
society,  between  independence  and  servility,  be- 
came complete. 

Such  is  the  history  of  the  Council  written  a5 
extra  in  the  last  nine  months.  I  believe  that  every 
epithet  I  have  given  may  be  venfied  in  the  mass 
of  extracts  now  before  me. 

A  leading  English  journal,  ten  days  after  the 
Definition  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff, 
with  great  simplicity  observed,  "  It  is  curious  to 
compare  the  very  general  and  deep  interest  taken 
by  all  intelligent  observers  in  the  early  delibera- 
tions of  the  Council  with  the  equally  marked  in- 
difference to  the  culmination  of  its  labors.  Every 
rumor  that  came  from  Rome  six  or  seven  months 
ago  was  canvassed  with  great  eagerness,  even  by 
men  who  cared  little  for  ordinary  theological  dis- 
putations ;  while  the  proclamation  of  the  astonish- 
ing dogma  of  papal  infallibility  has  produced  in 
any  but  ecclesiastical  circles  little  beyond  a  certain 
amount  of  prefunctory  criticism." 

The  main  cause  of  this  contrast  is,  of  course, 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


ig 


not  far  to  seek.  The  writer  proceeds  to  assign  the 
cause,  and  in  so  doing  passes  at  once,  with  a  gravity 
befitting  the  occasion,  to  a  disqir'' ition  on  Sir 
William  Hamilton's  theory  of  perception,  and  on 
"  the  gigantic  gooseberry." 

Such  is  the  earnestness  and  the  sincerity  with 
which  English  journals,  even  of  high  repute,  have 
treated  the  subject  of  the  CEcumenical  Council. 

Let  me,  also,  assign  the  cause  why  the  un-Cath- 
olic  and  anti-Catholic  world  took  so  clamorous  an 
interest  in  the  opening  of  the  Council,  and  in  the 
end  affected  so  ill-sustained  a  tone  of  indifference. 
I  know  of  no  public  event  in  our  day  the  explana- 
tion of  which  is  more  transparent  and  self-evident. 
It  is  this : 

When  the  Council  assembled,  it  was  both  hoped 
and  believed  that  the  "  Roman  Curia "  and  the 
"  Ultramontane  party "  would  be  checked  and 
brought  under  by  the  decisions  of  the  Bishops. 
A  controversy  had  been  waged  against  what  was 
termed  "  Ultramontanism,"  or  "  Ultra -Catholic- 
ism," or  "  Ultra-Romanism,"  in  Germany,  France, 
and  England.  When  I  last  addressed  you  I  used 
the  following  words,  which  I  now  repeat,  because 
I  can  find  none  more  exact.  They  have  been  ful- 
filled to  the  very  letter  : 

"  Facts  like  these  give  a  certain  warrant  to  the 
assertions  and  prophecies  of  politicians  and  Prot- 
estants. They  prove  that  in  the  Catholic  Church 
there  is  a  school  at  variance  with  the  doctrinal 
teaching  of  the  Holy  See  in  matters  which  are  not 
of  faith.  But  they  do  not  reveal  how  small  that 
school  is.  Its  centre  would  seem  to  be  at  Munich ; 
it  has,  both  in  France  and  in  England,  a  small 


20 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


If  :l 


i  ;l 


\1 

H 


number  of  adherents.  They  are  active,  they  cor- 
respond, and,  for  the  most  part,  write  anonymously. 
It  would  be  difficult  to  describe  its  tenets,  for  none 
of  its  followers  seem  to  be  agreed  in  all  points. 
Some  hold  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope,  and  some 
defend  the  Temporal  Power.  Nothing  appears  to 
be  common  to  all,  except  an  animus  of  opposition 
to  the  acts  of  the  Holy  See  in  matters  outside  the 
faith. 

"  In  this  country,  about  a  year  ago,  an  attempt 
was  made  to  render  impossible,  as  it  was  confidently 
but  vainly  thought,  the  definition  of  the  infallibility 
of  the  Pontiff,  by  reviving  the  monotonous  contro- 
versy about  Pope  Honorius.  Later  we  were  told 
of  I  know  not  what  combination  of  exalted  per- 
sonages in  France  for  the  same  end.  It  is  certain 
that  these  symptoms  are  not  sporadic  and  discon- 
nected, but  in  mutual  understanding,  and  with  a 
common  purpose.  The  anti-Catholic  press  has 
eagerly  encouraged  this  school  of  thought.  If  a 
Catholic  can  be  found  out  of  tune  with  authority 
by  half  a  note,  he  is  at  once  extolled  for  unequalled 
authority  and  irrefragable  logic.  The  anti-Catholic 
journals  are  at  his  service,  and  he  vents  his  oppo- 
sition to  the  common  opinions  of  the  Church  by 
writing  against  them  anonymously.  Sad  as  this 
is,  it  is  not  formidable.  It  has  effect  almost  alone 
upon  those  who  are  not  Catholic.  Upon  Catholics 
its  effect  is  hardly  appreciable  ;  on  the  theological 
Schools  of  the  Church,  it  will  have  little  influence ; 
upon  the  (Ecumenical  Council  it  can  have  none,*  " 

Many  publications  had  appeared  in  French,  Eng- 


»  Pastoral  on  "  The  (Ecmuenlcal  Council,  1869,"  &c.  pp.  132, 133. 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


M 


lish,  and  German,  from  which  it  became  evident 
that  a  common  purpose  and  plan  of  co-operation 
had  been  formed.  Certain  notorious  letters  pub- 
lished in  France,  and  the  infamous  book  "  Janus," 
translated  into  English,  French,  and  Italian,  pro- 
claimed open  war  upon  the  Council  within  the 
unity  of  the  Catholic  Church.  This  alone  was 
enough  to  set  the  whole  anti-Catholic  world  on 
fire  with  curiosity,  hope,  and  delight.  The  learn- 
ing, the  science  of  the  intellectual  freemen  of  the 
Roman  Church  were  already  under  arms  to  reduce 
the  pretensions  of  Rome. 

A  belief  had  also  spread  itself  that  the  Council 
would  explain  away  the  doctrines  of  Trent,  or  give 
them  some  new  or  laxer  meaning,  or  throw  open 
some  questions  supposed  to  be  closed,  or  come  to 
a  compromise  or  transaction  with  other  religious 
systems ;  or  at  least  that  it  would  accommodate 
the  dogmatic  stiffness  of  its  traditions  to  modern 
thought  and  modern  theology.  It  is  strange 
that  any  one  should  have  forgotten  that  every 
General  Council,  from  Nicsea  to  Trent,  which  has 
touched  on  the  faith,  has  made  new  definitions,  and 
that  every  new  definition  is  a  new  dogma,  and 
closes  what  was  before  open,  and  ties  up  more 
strictly  the  doctrines  of  faith.  This  belief,  how- 
ever, excited  an  expectation,  mixed  with  hopes, 
that  Rome  by  becoming  comprehensive  might  be- 
come approachable,  or  by  becoming  inconsistent 
might  become  powerless  over  the  reason  and  the 
will  of  men. 

But  the  interest  excited  by  this  preliminary  skir- 
mishing external  to  the  Council,  was  nothing  com- 
pared to  the  exultation  with  which  the  anti-Catho- 


as 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


lie  Opinion  and  anti-Catholic  press  of  Protestant 
countries,  and  the  anti-Roman  opinion  and  press 
even  of  Catholic  countries,  beheld,  as  they  believed, 
the  formation  of  an  organized  "  international  oppo- 
sition "  of  more  than  a  hundred  Bishops  within  the 
Council  itself.  The  day  was  come  at  last.  What 
the  world  could  not  do  against  Rom  3  from  with- 
out, its  own  Bishops  were  going  to  do  against 
Rome,  and  in  the  world's  service,  from  within,  I 
shall  hereafter  show  how  little  the  world  knew  the 
Bishops  whom  it  wronged  by  its  adulation,  and 
damaged  by  its  praise.  They  were  the  favorites 
of  the  world,  because  they  were  believed  to  be 
fighting  the  Pope.  In  a  moment,  all  the  world 
rose  up  to  meet  them.  Governments,  politicians, 
newspapers,  schismatical,  heretical,  infidel,  Jewish, 
revolutionary,  as  with  one  unerring  instinct,  united 
in  extolling  and  setting  forth  the  virtue,  learning, 
science,  eloquence,  nobleness,  heroism  of  this  "  in- 
ternational opposition."  With  an  iteration  truly 
Homeric,  certain  epithets  were  perpetually  linked 
to  certain  names.  All  who  were  against  Rome  were 
written  up  ;  all  who  were  for  Rome  were  written 
down.  The  public  eye  and  ear  of  all  countries 
were  filled,  and  taught  to  associate  all  that  is  noble 
and  great  with  the  "  international  opposition  ;  "  all 
that  is  neither  noble  nor  great,  not  to  say  more, 
with  others.  The  interest  was  thus  wrought  up  to 
the  highest  pitch ;  and  a  confident  expectation  was 
raised,  and  spread  abroad,  that  the  Council  would 
be  unable  to  make  a  definition,  and  that  Rome 
would  be  defeated.  I  can  hardly  conceive  a  keen- 
er or  more  vivid  motive  of  interest  to  the  anti- 
Catholic  world  than  this.    For  this  cause  Rome 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


2$ 


was  full  of  correspondents,  "  our  own,"  "  our  spec- 
ial," and  "  our  occasional."  Private  persons  for- 
sook great  interests  and  duties,  to  reside  in  Rome 
for  the  support  of  the  *'  international  opposition." 
A  league  of  newspapers,  fed  from  a  common  cen- 
tre, diffused  hope  and  confidence  in  all  countries, 
that  the  science  and  enlightenment  of  the  minority 
would  save  the  Catholic  Church  from  the  immod- 
erate pretensions  of  Rome,  and  the  superstitious 
ignorance  of  the  universal  Episcopate.  Day  after 
day,  the  newspapers  teemed  with  the  achievements 
and  orations  of  the  opposition.  The  World  be- 
lieved that  it  had  found  its  own  in  the  heart  of  the 
Episcopate,  and  loved  it  as  its  own.  There  was 
nothing  it  might  not  hope  for,  expect,  and  predict. 
In  truth,  it  is  no  wonder  that  a  very  intense  inter- 
est should  be  excited  in  minds  hostile  to  Rome  by 
such  a  spectacle  as  the  outer  world  then  believed 
itself  to  see.  And  such,  we  may  safely  affirm,  were 
the  chief  motives  of  its  feverish  excitement,  at  the 
opening  and  during  the  early  period  of  the  Coun- 
cil. 

But  how  shall  we  account  for  the  indifference 
with  which  the  World  affects  to  treat  its  close  ? 

By  two  very  obvious  reasons.  First,  because  it 
became  gradually  certain  that  the  World  had  not 
found  its  own  in  the  Council ;  and  that  the  "  oppo- 
sition "  on  which  it  counted  were  not  the  servants 
of  the  World,  but  Bishops  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
who,  while  using  all  freedom  which  the  Church 
abundantly  gave  them,  would,  in  heart,  mind,  and 
will,  remain  faithful  to  its  divine  authority  and 
voice.  And  secondly,  because  it  became  equally 
certain,  indeed  was  self-evident,  that  no  opposition, 


24 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


[( 


from  without  or  from  within,  could  move  the  Coun- 
cil a  hair's  breadth  out  of  the  course  in  which  it 
was  calmly  and  irresistibl}'  moving  to  its  appoint- 
ed work. 

The  hopes  and  confidence  of  the  miscellaneous 
alliance  of  nominal  Catholics,  Protestants,  rational- 
ists, and  unbelievers,  received  its  first  sharp  check 
when  some  five  hundred  Fathers  of  the  Council 
desired  of  the  Holy  See  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  should  be  defin- 
ed.* This  event  manifested  a  mind  and  a  will  so 
united  and  so  decisive,  as  to  reduce  the  propor- 
tions of  the  opposition,  both  numerically  and  mor- 
ally, to  very  little.  Still  it  was  confidently  hoped 
that  some  event,  in  the  chapter  of  accidents,  might 
yet  hinder  the  definition  ;  that  either  the  minority 
might  become  more  powerful  by  increase,  or  the 
majority  less  solid  by  division. 

This  expectation  again  was  rudely  shaken  by  the 
unanimous  vote  of  the  third  public  Session.  The 
first  Constitution  De  Fide  had  been  so  vehemently 
assailed,  and,  as  it  was  imagined,  so  utterly  defeat- 
ed, that  if  ever  voted  at  all  it  would  be  voted  only 
by  a  small  majority,  or  at  least  it  would  be  resisted 
by  an  imposing  minority.  It  was  therefore  no 
small  surprise  that  the  whole  Council,  consisting 
then  of  664  Fathers,  should  have  affirmed  it  with 
an  unanimous  vote.  I  well  remember  that  when 
the  "  Placets''  of  the  "  opposition  leaders  "  sounded 
through  the  Council  Hall,  certain  high  diplomatic 
personages  looked  significantly  at  each  other. 
This  majestic  unanimity,  after  the  alleged  internal 


*  See  Appendix,  p.  9. 


THE  WORLD   AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


25 


contentions  of  the  Council,  was  as  perplexing  as  it 
Avas  undeniable.  The  World  began  to  fear  that, 
after  all,  the  international  opposition  would  neither 
serve  its  purpose  nor  do  its  work.  A  sensible 
change  of  tone  was  then  perceived.  The  corres- 
pondents wrote  of  everything  but  of  this  unanim- 
ity. The  newspapers  became  almost  silent.  The 
leading  articles  almost  ceased.  From  that  time 
they  exchanged  the  tone  of  confidence  and  triumph 
for  a  tone  of  iritation  and  of  no  little  bitterness. 

Nevertheless,  a  new  hope  arose.  Governments 
were  acted  upon  to  make  representations,  and  all 
but  to  menace  the  Holy  Father.*  For  a  time,  con- 
fidence revived.  It  was  thought  impossible  that 
the  joint  note  of  so  many  Powers,  and  the  joint 
influence  of  so  many  diplomatists,  could  fail  of  their 
effect.  It  did  not  seem  to  occur  to  those  who  in- 
voked the  interference  of  the  Civil  Powers  that 
they  were  thereby  endeavoring  to  deprive  the 
Council  of  its  liberty ;  which,  in  those  who  were 
complaining,  in  all  languages,  that  the  Council  was 
not  free,  involved  a  self-contradiction  on  which  I 
need  not  comment.  Neither  did  they  seem  to  re- 
member that  those  who  invoke  the  secular  power 
against  the  spiritual  authority  of  the  Church, 
whether  to  defeat  a  sentence  already  given,  or  to 
prevent  the  delivery  of  such  a  sentence,  are  ipso 
facto  excommunicate,  and  that  their  case  is  reserv- 
ed to  the  Pope.f    This,  which  applies  to  any  ordi- 


*  See  Appendix,  p,  18  L 

f  AjypcUantcs  sea  rccurrcntcs  oil  curiam  8(vctdare7n  ab  ordinor 
iionihiiK  aliciijiiH  Jndicis  crrlt'sidstici  excommiinicutioneni  iucurrunt 
Papnn  rcsiTvutuin  (>x  t-ii]).  IG  IJiilla'  Jii  Ctvna  Domini,  sivo  illi  jiulices 
(xxloaiustici  Hint  ordiuurii  «ive  dologuU,  ut  putct  iu  cadoiu  Bulla  :  et 


26 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


nary  ecclesiastical  judge  in  matters  of  law,  surely 
applies  in  an  eminent  degree  to  an  Qj^cumenical 
Council  in  matters  of  faith.  Be  this  as  it  may,  for 
a  time  the  interest  of  the  World  was  re-awakened 
by  the  hope  that  Rome  would  be  in  some  way 
baffled  after  all. 

But  this  hope  also  was  doomed  to  disappoint- 
ment. The  distribution  by  the  Cardinal  Presidents 
of  the  Additamentum,  or  additional  chapter  on  the 
doctrine  of  Infallibility  ;  the  introduction  of  the 
Schema  de  Romano  Pontijice  before  the  Schema  de 
Ecclesia ;  the  closing  of  the  general  discussion  by 
a  vote  of  the  Council ;  all  alike  showed  that  the 
Council  knew  its  own  mind,  and  was  resolved  to 
do  its  duty.  It  became  unmistakably  clear  how 
few  were  in  opposition ;  and  equally  certain  that, 
when  the  definition  should  be  completed,  all  oppo- 
sition would  cease.  The  interest  in  the  Council, 
manifested  by  the  anti-Catholic  World,  at  once 
collapsed.  The  correspondents  became  silent,  or 
only  found  reasons  why  nobody  cared  any  longer 
for  the  Council.  A  period  of  supercilious  disdain 
followed ;  and  then  the  correspondents  of  the  Eng- 
lish journals,  one  by  one,  left  Rome.  The  game 
was  played  out ;  and  the  last  hope  of  an  intestine 
conflict  in  the  Church  was  over.  A  more  disap- 
pointing end  to  the  high  hopes  and  excited  anti- 


multi  (licuut  hoc  procedoro,  etiamsi  sic  appollantps  ct  recurrcntes 
nulla  tkcreta  poonalia  aut  inlubitiones  contra  eosdem  judicoa  eccle- 
siasticos  obtineant ;  alii  tamen  contrarium  tonent.  Vido  intorprctos 
super  dicta  Bulla  cap.  19,  ct  IJonacina  de  Ccnsiir.  in  partic.  disp.  1, 
q.  17,  punct.  1,  num.  28,  qui  auctoros  pro  utraquo  parte  allofjat.  Et 
continot  otlam  judices  secularos,  (jui  ea  occasiono  deccrnunt  contra 
dictos  judices  cccleBiasticos,  ct  eos  qui  ilia  dccreta  exoquuntur ;  et, 


THE   WORLD   AND   THE   COUNCIL. 


27 


'4 
'4 


cipations  with  which  the  adversaries  of  the  Catholic 
Church  cheered  on  thQ  opposition  at  the  opening 
of  the  year,  cannot  be  conceived.  They  Httle  knew 
the  men  whom  they  were  mortifying  and  dishonor- 
ing by  their  applause.  They  forgot  that  Bishops 
are  not  deputies,  and  that  an  CEcumenical  Council 
is  not  a  Parliament.  And  when,  of  the  eighty- 
eight  who  on  the  thirteenth  of  July  voted  Non 
placet,  two  only  repeated  their  Non  placet  on  the 
eighteenth,  proving  thereby  that  what  two  could 
do  eighty  might  have  done,  the  World  was  silent, 
and  has  steadfastly  excluded  the  Constitution  De 
Romano  Pontifice  from  the  columns  of  its  news- 
papers. 

Here  is  the  simple  and  self-evident  reason  of  this 
pretended  loss  of  interest  in  the  Council.  It  is  the 
affected  indifference  of  those  who,  having  staked 
their  reputation  on  the  issue  of  a  contest,  have 
been  thoroughly  and  hopelessly  disappointed.  " 

Before  I  conclude  this  part  of  the  subject,  I  will 
give  one  passage  as  a  supreme  example  of  what  I 
have  been  describing.  I  take  it  from  the  chief 
newspaper  in  England.  It  is  from  an  article  evi- 
dently written  by  a  cultivated  and  practiced  hand. 
It  appeared  when  the  definition  was  seen  to  be  cer- 
tain and  near.  It  was  intended  to  ruin  its  effects 
beforehand.     The  writer  could  not  narrate  what 

continet  dantcs  conBiliura,  patrociuium,  ot  favorera  in  eisdem,  ut 
patct  ex  eadom  Bulla. 

In  hac  materia  vide  plures  poDnas  infra  verb.  Curia,  c.  8,  et  verb. 
Jarisdictio,  ot  procedit  ctiani  in  tacita,  seu  anticipata  appellationo 
ad  procurnndum  inipcdiri  futuras  ordinatlones  judicii  ecclesiastici, 
ut  Bonac.  num.  SJJ,  juxta  probubiliorem. — Q\x»\Ci\iB  de  Pcaim  Eccl. 
par«  ii.  c  iii.  vol.  v.  p.  00. 


28 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


had  taken  place,  because  it  was  before  the  event ; 
nor  what  would  really  take  place,  because  nothing 
w^.s  known ;  but  what  he  thought  would  excite 
contempt,  that  he  pleased  to  say  would  take  place. 
Neveitheless,  he  spoke  as  if  the  events  were  cer- 
tain, and  already  so  ordered ;  which  truth  forbade : 
and  he  taxed  his  ingenuity  to  make  the  whole  ac- 
count in  the  highest  degree  odious  or  ridiculous  ; 
which  revealed  his  motive.  The  reader  will  bear 
in  mind  that  not  one  particle  of  the  following  ela- 
borate description  is  true,  or  had  even  a  shadow  of 
truth.  But  nobody  would  perceive  the  fine  verbal 
distinctions  on  which  the  writer  would  defend  him- 
self from  a  charge  of  deliberate  falsehood. 

On  June  8,  we  read  as  follows : — 

"  The  British  public  have  some  reason  to  regret 
that  the  pressure  of  subjects  nearer  home,  and 
more  directly  concerning  this  country,  has  put 
their  interest  in  the  CEcumenical  Council  some- 
what in  abeyance.  A  great  event  is  at  hand. 
There  can  no  longer  be  any  doubt  that  at  the  ap- 
proaching Feast  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  the  29th 
instant,  the  priceless  blessing  of  Papal  Infallibility 
will  be  vouchsafed  to  the  world.  The  day  is  the 
Feast  of  St.  Peter  in  our  Calendar,  and  it  is  usually 
called  St.  Peter's  Day  at  Rome,  the  Apostle  to  the 
Gentiles  having  been  associated  only  to  disappear. 
The  day  is  on  this  occasion  to  be  observed  as  a  day 
of  days,  and  the  era  of  a  new  revelation.  Fireworks, 
illuminations,  transparencies,  triumphal  arches,  and 
all  that  taste  and  money  can  do  to  demonstrate  and 
delight,  are  already  in  hand,  and,  whoever  the 
guests,  the  marriage  feast  is  in  preparation.  .  .  .  An 
extraordinary  eflbrt  is  to  be  made.     Rome  is  to 


i 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


% 


excel  herself  in  her  mimic  meteors,  her  artistic 
transfigurations,  her  new  heavens  and  new  earths, 
her  angelic  radiance,  her  divine  glories,  and  infer- 
nal horrors.  If  the  Council  has  been  chary  of  its 
utterances  and  coy  in  its  appearances,  that  will  be 
made  up  by  explosions  and  spectacles  of  a  more  in- 
telligible character.  We  can  promise  that  it  will 
be  worth  many  miles  of  excursion  trains  to  go  and 
see.  The  Campagna  will  be  deserted,  that  all  the 
Pope's  temporal  lieges  may  be  there  in  their  pic- 
turesque costumes.  They  and  the  astonished 
strangers  will  there  see  with  their  own  eyes  the 
Pope  of  Rome,  the  actual  successor  of  St.  Peter, 
invested  with  absolute  authority  over  all  souls, 
hearts  and  minds.  They  will  see  him  welcoming 
the  faithful  ^Placets,'  and  consigning  the  ^Non- 
Placets  *  to  the  flames  of  a  Tartarean  abyss.  They 
will  see  hideous  forms,  snakes,  dragons^  hydras, 
centipedes,  toads,  and  nondescript  monsters  un- 
der the  feet,  or  the  lance,  or  the  thunderbolt  of 
conquering  Rome ;  and  they  will  not  fail  to  rec- 
ognize in  them  the  Church  of  England,  the  Prot- 
estant communities,  and  the  German  philosophers. 
It  will  be  a  grand  day,  and  great  things  will  be 
done  on  that  29th  of  June.  We  will  not  believe  it 
possible  that  a  single  mishap  will  disturb  the  sacred 
programme  —  that  the  lightnings  may  miss  their 
aim,  or  the  Powers  of  Darkness  prevail.  We  can- 
not doubt  all  will  go  off"  well,  for  the  simple  reason 
that  all  is  ready  and  forecasted,  down  to  the  very 
Dogma.  Artists  of  surpassing  skill  and  taste  are 
working  hard  on  the  Upholstery  of  the  Divine 
manifestation,  not  knowing  whether  to  think  it  a 
blasphemy  or  a  good  joke.     It  is  their  poverty  and 


30 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


not  their  will  that  consents  to  the  task.  As  we  see 
the  illuminations  expiring,  the  Roman  candles  lost 
in  smoke,  and  the  exhibitors  taking  the  old  proper- 
ties back  to  the  vast  magazines  of  Rome,  we  cannot 
help  thinking  of  the  poor  fathers  put  off  with  glare 
and  noise  in  place  of  conviction  and  peace  of  mind. 
Think  of  poor  MacHale  exhausting  in  vain  his 
logic,  his  learning,  and  his  powerful  style,  and  tak- 
ing back  to  his  poor  flock  on  the  Atlantic  shore  a 
strange  story  of  Chinese  lanterns,  fiery  bouquets, 
showers  of  gold,  and  transparencies  more  striking 
even  than  the  illustrations  of  our  prophetic  alman- 
acks." 

When  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  the  definition  of 
the  Infallibility  of  the  Head  of  the  Christian  Church 
is  a  subject  of  deep  religious  faith  to  the  most  cul- 
tivated nations  of  the  world,  and  that  a  fifth  part  of 
the  population  of  our  three  kingdoms  was  pro- 
foundly interested  in  the  subject,  I  shall  refrain 
from  saying  that  this  article  from  the  leading 
newspaper  of  England  has  as  little  decency  as 
truth. 

I  will  now  endeavor  briefly  to  sketch  the  outline 
of  the  Council  as  viewed  from  within.  As  I  was 
enabled  to  attend,  with  the  exception  of  about 
three  or  four  days,  every  Session  of  the  Council, 
eighty-nine  in  number,  from  the  opening  to  the 
close,  I  can  give  testimony,  not  upon  hearsay,  but 
as  a  personal  witness  of  what  I  narrate. 

Cardinal  Pallavicini,  after  relating  the  contests 
and  jealousies  of  the  Orators  of  Catholic  States 
assembled  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  goes  on  to  say 
that  to  convoke  a  General  Council,  except  when 
absolutely   demanded    by   necessity,   is  to  tempt 


""^ 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


31 


-  V 


God.*  I  well  remember,  at  the  time  of  the  centen- 
ary of  St.  Peter's  Martyrdom,  when  the  Holy  Fa- 
ther first  announced  his  intention  to  convene  the 
General  Council,  one  of  the  oldest  and  most  expe- 
rienced of  foreign  diplomatists  expressed  to  me  his 
great  alarm.  He  predicted  exactly  what  came  to 
pass  in  the  beginning  of  the  Council.  His  diplo- 
matic foresight  fully  appreciated  the  political  dan- 
gers. They  were  certainly  obvious  and  grave  ;  for 
no  one  perhaps,  at  that  time,  could  anticipate  the 
majestic  unity  and  firmness  of  the  Council,  which 
exceeded  all  hopes,  and  has  effectually  dispelled  all 
fears. 

For  three  hundred  years,  the  Church  dispersed 
throughout  the  world  has  been  in  contact  with  the 
corrupt  civilization  of  old  Catholic  countries,  and 
with  the  anti-Catholic  civilization  of  countries  in 
open  schism.  The  intellectual  traditions  of  nearly 
all  nations  have  been  departing  steadily  from  the 
unity  of  the  Faith  and  of  the  Church.  In  most 
countries,  public  opinion  has  become  formally  hos- 
tile to  the  Catholic  religion.  The  minds  of  Catho- 
lics have  been  much  affected  by  the  atmosphere  in 
which  they  live.  It  was  to  be  feared  and  to  be  ex- 
pected that  the  Bishops  of  all  the  world,  differing 
so  widely  in  race,  political  institutions,  and  intel- 
lectual habits,  might  have  imported  into  the  Coun- 
cil elements  of  divergence,  if  not  of  irreconcilable 
division.  Some  had  indeed  met  before,  at  the 
Canonizations  of  1862  or  1867;  but  for  the  most 
part  the  Bishops  met  for  the  first  time.     The  Pas- 


*HiBt.  Cone. 
1C70. 


Trkl.  lib.  xvi.  c.  10,  torn.  ii.  p.  800.    Antwerp, 


i 


1 

I 


32 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


tors  of  some  thirty  nations  were  thfere,  bringing 
together  every  variety  of  mental  and  social  culture 
and  experience :  but  in  the  midst  of  this  variety 
there  reigned  a  perfect  identity  of  faith.  On  this, 
three  centuries  of  separation  and  divergence  in  all 
things  of  the  natural  order,  had  produced  no  effect. 
Nothing  but  the  Church  of  God  alone  could  have 
lived  on  immutable  through  three  hundred  years 
of  perpetual  changes,  and  under  the  most  potent 
influences  of  the  world.  Nothing  has  ever  more 
luminously  exhibited  the  supernatural  endowments 
of  the  Church  than  the  Council  of  the  Vatican.  In 
these  three  centuries  it  had  passed  through  revolu- 
tions which  have  dissolved  empires,  laws,  opinions. 
But  the  Episcopate  of  the  CathoHc  Church  met 
again  last  December  in  Rome,  as  it  met  in  Trent, 
Lyons,  or  Nicasa.  At  once  it  proceeded  to  its 
work  ;  and  began  as  if  by  instinct,  or  by  the  prompt 
facility  of  an  imperishable  experience,  to  define 
doctrines  of  faith  and  to  decree  laws  of  discipline. 
Such  unity  of  mind  and  will  is  above  the  condi- 
tions of  human  infirmity ;  it  can  be  traced  to  one 
power  and  guidance  alone,  the  supernatural  assist- 
ance of  the  Spirit  of  Truth,  by  Whom  the  Church 
of  God  is  perpetually  sustained  in  the  light  and 
unity  of  faith. 

To  those  who  were  within  the  Council,  this  be- 
came, day  by  day,  almost  evident  to  sense.  It  was 
no  diminution  from  this,  that  a  certain  number 
were  found  who  were  of  opinion  that  it  was  inop- 
portune to  define  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff.  This  was  a  question  of  prudence,  policy, 
expedience ;  not  of  doctrine  or  of  truth.  It  was 
thus  that  the  Church  was  united  twenty  years  ago 


THE  WORLD   AND   THE  COUNCIL. 


$$ 


in  the  belief  of  the  Immaculate  Conception,  while 
some  were  still  to  be  found  who  doubted  the  pru- 
dence of  defining  it.  Setting  aside  this  one  ques- 
tion of  opportuneness,  there  was  not  in  the  Coun- 
cil of  the  Vatican  a  difference  of  any  gravity,  and 
certainly  no  difference  whatsoever  on  any  doctrine 
of  faith.  I  have  never  been  able  to  hear  of  five 
Bishops  who  denied  the  doctrine  of  Papal  Infalli- 
bility. Almost  all  previous  Councils  were  distract- 
ed by  divisions,  if  not  by  heresy.  Here  no  heresy 
existed.  The  question  of  opportunity  was  alto- 
gether subordinate  and  free.  It  may  truly  be  af- 
firmed that  never  was  there  a  greater  unanimity 
than  in  the  Vatican  Council.  Of  this  the  world 
had  a  first  evidence  in  the  unanimous  vote  by 
which  the  first  Constitution  on  Faith  was  affirmed 
on  the  24th  of  April. 

I  should  hardly  have  spoken  of  the  outward  con- 
duct of  the  Council,  if  I  had  not  seen,  with  surprise 
and  indignation,  statements  purporting  to  be  des- 
criptions of  scenes  of  violence  and  disorder  in  the 
course  of  its  discussions.  Having  from  my  earliest 
remembrance  been  a  witness  of  public  assemblies 
of  all  kinds,  and  especially  of  those  among  our- 
selves, which  for  gravity  and  dignity  are  supposed 
to  exceed  all  others,  I  am  able  and  bound  to  say 
that  I  have  never  seen  such  calmness,  self-respect 
mutual-forbearance,  courtesy  and  self-control,  as  in 
the  eighty-nine  sessions  of  the  Vatican  Council. 
In  a  period  of  nine  months,  the  Cardinal  President 
was  compelled  to  recall  the  speakers  to  order  per- 
haps twelve  or  fourteen  times.  In  any  other  as- 
sembly they  would  have  been  inexorably  recalled 
to  the  question  sevenfold  oftener  and  sooner. 
2* 


34 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


■! 


Nothing  could  exceed  the  consideration  and  res- 
pect with  which  this  duty  was  discharged.  Occa- 
sionally murmurs  of  dissent  were  audit  le  ;  now 
and  then  a  comment  may  have  been  made  aloud. 
In  a  very  few  instances,  and  those  happily  of  an 
exceptional  kind,  expressions  of  strong  disapproval 
and  of  exhausted  patience  at  length  escaped.  But 
the  descriptions  of  violence,  outcries,  menace,  de- 
nunciation, and  even  of  personal  collisions,  with 
which  certain  newspapers  deceived  the  world,  I 
can  affirm  to  be  calumnious  falsehoods,  fabricated 
to  bring  the  Council  into  odium  and  contempt. 
That  such  has  been  the  iim  and  intent  of  certain 
journals  and  their  correspondents  is  undeniable. 
They  at  first  attempted  to  write  it  down ;  but  an 
CEcumenical  Council  cannot  be  written  down. 
Next,  they  endeavored  to  treat  it  with  ridicule ; 
but  an  CEcumenical  Council  cannot  be  made  ridi- 
culous. The  good  sense  of  the  world  forbids  it. 
But  it  may  be  made  odious  and  hateful ;  and 
thereby  the  minds  of  men  may  be  not  only  turned 
from  it,  but  even  turned  against  it.  For  this  in 
every  way  the  anti-Catholic  world  has  labored ; 
and  no  better  plan  could  be  found  'than  to  describe 
its  sessions  as  scenes  of  indecent  clamor  and  per- 
sonal violence,  unworthy  even  in  laymen,  criminal 
in  Bishops  of  the  Church.  I  have  read  descrip- 
tions of  scenes  of  which  I  Mas  a  personal  witness,  so 
absolutely  contrary  to  fact  and  truth,  that  I  cannot 
acquit  the  anonymous  writer  on  the  plea  of  error. 
The  a'limus  was  manifest,  and  its  effect  has  been 
and  will  be  to  poison  a  multitude  of  minds  which 
the  truth  will  never  reach. 

It   has  been   loudly  declared,  that  a  tyrannical 


THE  WORLD   AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


35 


majority  deprived  the  minority  of  liberty  of  dis- 
cussion. 

Now  it  is  hard  to  beHeve  this  allegation  to  be 
sincere,  for  many  reasons. 

First,  there  was  only  one  rule  for  both  majority 
and  minority.  If  either  were  deprived  of  liberty, 
both  were ;  if  both  were,  it  might  be  unwise,  it 
could  not  be  unjust ;  but  if  both  were  not,  then 
neither.  The  majority  spontaneously  and  freely 
imposed  upon  itself  the  same  conditions  it  accepted 
for  all. 

But  secondly,  the  mode  of  conducting  the  dis- 
cussions afforded  the  amplest  liberty  of  debate. 

The  subject  matter  was  distributed  in  print  to 
every  Bishop,  and  a  period  of  eight  or  ten  days 
was  given  for  any  observations  they  might  desire 
to  make  in  writing. 

These  observations  were  carefully  examined  by 
the  deputation  of  twenty-four ;  and  when  found  to 
be  pertinent  were  admitted,  either  to  modify  or  to 
reform  the  original  Schema. 

The  text  so  amended  was  then  proposed  for  the 
general  discussion,  on  which  every  Bishop  in  the 
Council  had  a  free  right  to  speak,  and  the  discus- 
sions lasted  so  long  as  any  Bishop  was  pleased  to 
inscribe  his  name. 

The  only  limit  upon  this  freedom  of  discussion 
consisted  in  the  power  of  the  Presidents,  on  the 
petition  of  ten  Bishops  to  interrogate  the  Council 
whether  it  desired  the  discussion  to  be  prolonged. 
The  Presidents  had  no  power  to  close  the  discus- 
sion. The  Council  alone  could  put  an  end  to  it. 
This  right  is  essential  to  every  deliberative  assem- 
bly ;  which  has  a  two-fold  liberty,  the  one,  to  listen 


36 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


i 


n 


as  long  as  it  shall  see  fit ;  the  other,  to  refuse  to 
listen  when  it  shall  judge  that  a  subject  has  been 
sufficiently  discussed.  To  deny  this  liberty  to  the 
Council  is  to  claim  for  individuals  the  liberty  to 
force  the  Council  to  listen  as  long  as  they  are 
pleased  either  to  waste  its  time  or  to  obstruct  its 
judgment.  In  political  assemblies,  the  house  puts 
an  end  to  debates  by  a  peremptory  and  inexorable 
cry  of  "  question  "  or  "  divide."  The  assemblies 
of  the  Church  are  of  another  temper.  But  they 
are  not  deprived  of  the  same  essential  rights ;  and 
by  a  free  vote  they  may  decide  either  to  listen,  or 
not  to  listen,  as  the  judgment  of  the  Council  shall 
see  fit.  To  deny  this  is  to  deny  the  liberty  of  the 
Council ;  and  under  the  pretext  of  liberty  to  claim 
a  tyranny  for  the  few  over  the  will  of  the  many.* 

Obvious  as  is  this  liberty  and  right  of  the  Coun- 
cil to  close  its  discussions  when  it  shall  see  fit, 
there  exists  only  one  example  on  record  in  which 
it  did  so.  With  exemplary  patience  it  listened  to 
what  the  House  of   Commons   would   have  pro- 

*  I  cannot  help  here  marking  a  historical  parallel.  Those  who 
had  been  invoking  the  anti-Catholic  public  opinion,  and  even  the 
civil  governments  cf  all  countries,  to  control  the  Holy  See  and  the 
Council,  complained  of  oppression  and  tlie  violation  of  their  liberty. 

When  Nai)oleon  held  Pius  VII.  prisoner  at  Fontainebleau,  and  by 
every  form  of  threat  and  influence  had  deprived  him  of  liberty,  the 
following  warning  was  given  by  Colonel  Lagorse  to  Cardinal  Pacca, 
then  in  attendance  upon  the  Pope  :  "  That  the  Emperor  was  dis- 
pleased with  the  Cardinals,  for  having,  ever  since  their  arrival  at 
Fontainebleau,  continually  restricted  the  Pope  from  a  condition  of 
free  agency ;  that  provided  they  were  desirous  of  remaining  at  Fon- 
tainebleau, they  must  abstain  from  all  matters  of  interforonco  in 
matters  of  business.  .  .  .  Failing  in  the  above  conditions,  tboy. 
would  expose  themselves  to  the  hazard  of  losing  their  liberty."— 
Memoira  of  Cardinal  Pacca,  vol.  ii.  p.  193. 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


37 


nounced  to  be  interminable  discussions  and  inter- 
minable speeches.  On  the  general  discussion  of 
the  Schema  De  Romano  Pontifice  some  eighty  Bish- 
ops had  spoken.  Of  these,  nearly  half  were  of 
what  the  newspapers  called  the  Opposition ;  but 
the  proportion  of  the  Opposition  to  the  Council 
was  not  more  than  one  sixth.  They  had  therefore 
been  heard  as  three  to  six.  But  further,  there  still 
remained  the  special  discussion  on  the  Proemium 
and  the  four  chapters ;  that  is  to  say,  five  distinct 
discussions  still  remained,  in  which  every  Bishop 
of  the  six  or  seven  hundred  in  the  Council  would, 
therefore,  have  a  right  to  speak  five  times.  Most 
reasonably,  then,  the  Council  closed  the  general 
discussion,  leaving  to  the  Bishops  still  their  un- 
diminished right,  if  they  saw  fit,  still  to  speak  five 
times.  No  one  but  those  who  desired  the  discus- 
sion never  to  end,  that  is,  who  desired  to  render 
the  definition  impossible  by  speaking  against  time, 
could  complain  of  this  most  just  exercise  of  its  lib- 
erty on  the  part  of  the  Council.  I  can  conscien- 
tiously declare,  that  long  before  the  general  dis- 
cussion was  closed,  all  general  arguments  were 
exhausted.  The  special  discussion  of  details  also 
had  been  to  such  an  extent  anticipated,  that  nothing 
new  was  heard  for  days.  The  repetition  became  hard 
to  bear.  Then,  and  not  till  then,  the  President,  at 
the  petition  not  of  ten,  but  of  a  hundred  and  fifty 
Bishops,  at  least,  interrogated  the  Council  whether 
it  desired  to  prolong  or  close  the  general  discus- 
sion. By  an  overwhelming  majority  it  was  closed. 
When  this  was  closed,  still,  as  I  have  said,  five  dis- 
tinct discussions  commenced  ;  and  were  continued 
so  long  as  any  nne  was  to  be  found  desirous  to 


38 


THE  WORLD  AND  THE  COUNCIL. 


,!!« 


ii    i 


speak.  Finally,  for  the  fifth  or  last  discussion,  a 
hundred  and  twenty  inscribed  their  names  to 
speak.  Fifty  at  least  were  heard,  until  on  both 
sides  the  burden  became  too  heavy  to  bear ;  and, 
by  mutual  consent,  an  useless  and  endless  discus- 
sion, from  sheer  exhaustion,  ceased. 

So  much  for  the  material  liberty  of  the  Council. 
Of  the  moral  Uberty  it  will  be  enough  to  say,  that 
the  short-hand  writers  have  laid  up  in  its  Archives 
a  record  of  discourses  which  will  show  that  the 
liberty  of  thought  and  speech  was  perfectly  un- 
checked. If  they  were  published  to  the  world,  the 
accusation  would  not  be  of  undue  suppression. 
The  wonder  would  be,  not  that  the  Opposition 
failed  of  its  object,  but  that  the  Council  so  long 
held  its  peace.  Certain  Bishops  of  the  freest  coun- 
try in  the  world  said  truly  :  *'  The  liberty  of  our 
Congress  is  not  greater  than  the  liberty  of  the 
Council."  When  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  out  ot 
more  than  six  hundred  Bishops,  one  hundred,  at 
the  utmost,  were  in  opposition  to  their  brethren,  it 
seems  hardly  sincere  to  talk  of  the  want  of  liberty. 
There  was  but  one  liberty  of  which  this  sixth  part 
of  the  Council  was  deprived,  a  liberty  they  ccr- 
tair Ij  would  be  the  last  to  desire,  namely,  that  of 
destroying  the  liberty  of  the  other  five.  The 
Council  bore  long  with  this  truthless  accusation  of 
politicians,  newspapers,  and  anonymous  writers  ; 
and  never  till  the  last  day,  when  the  work  was 
finally  complete,  except  only  the  voting  of  the  pub- 
lic session,  took  cognizance  of  this  mendacious  pre- 
tence. On  the  i6th  of  July,  after  the  last  votes  had 
been  given,  and  the  first  Constitution  Dc  licclcsia 
C/iristi,  had   been   finally   approved,  then  for  the 


THE  WORLD  AND   THE   COUNCIL. 


39 


first  time  it  turned  its  attention  to  this  attempt 
upon  its  authority.  Two  calumnious  libels  on  the 
Council  had  appeared  ;  the  one  entitled,  Cc  qui  se 
passe  au  Concilc,  the  other,  La  dcrnitre  Jieiire  du  Coii- 
cile  :  in  both,  the  liberty  of  the  Vatican  Council  was 
denied,  with  a  view  to  denying  its  authority.  The 
General  Congregation  by  an  immense  majority 
adopted  the  following  protest,  and  condemned 
these  two  slanderous  pamphlets,  thereby  placing  on 
record  a  spontaneous  declaration  of  the  absolute 
freedom  of  the  Coimcil. 

"  Most  Reverend  Fathers, 

**  From  the  time  that  the  Holy  Vatican  Synod 
opened,  by  the  help  of  God,  a  most  bitter  warfare 
instantly  broke  out  against  it ;  and  in  order  to  di- 
minish its  venerable  authority  with  the  faithful, 
and,  if  it  could  be,  to  destroy  it  altogether,  many 
writers  vied  with  each  other  in  attacking  it  by  con- 
tumelious detraction,  and  by  the  foulest  calumnies  ; 
and  that,  not  only  among  the  heterodox  and  open 
enemies  of  the  Cross  of  Christ,  but  also  among 
those  who  give  themselves  out  as  sons  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church ;  and  what  is  most  to  be  deplored, 
among  even  its  sacred  ministers. 

'*  The  infamous  falsehoods  which  have  been  heap- 
ed together  in  this  matter  in  public  newspapers  of 
every  tongue,  and  in  pamphlets  without  the  au- 
thor's name,  published  in  all  places  and  stealthily 
distributed,  all  men  well  know  ;  so  that  we  have  no 
need  tc  lecount  them  one  by  one.  But  among 
anonym  :)us  pamplets  of  tliis  kind  there  are  two 
especial .y,  written  in  French,  and  entitled,  Ce  qui 
se  passe  lu  Conciic,  and  La  dernicre  heure  du  Concile, 


i; 


!'" 


'Hill 


f! 


lii; 


40 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


which  for  the  arts  of  calumny  and  the  lirense  of 
detraction  bear  away  the  pahii  from  all  others.  For 
in  these  not  only  is  the  dignity  and  full  liberty  of 
the  Council  assailed  with  the  basest  falsehoods,  and 
the  riQ-hts  of  the  Holv  See  overthrown,  but  even 
the  lugust  person  of  our  Holy  Father  is  attacked 
with  the  gravest  insults.  Wherefore  we,  being 
mindful  of  our  office,  lest  our  silence,  if  longer 
maintained,  should  be  perversely  interpreted  by 
men  of  evil  will,  are  compelled  to  lift  up  our  voice, 
and  before  you  all,  Most  Rever:;nd  Fathc.  s,  to  pro- 
test and  to  declare  all  such  things  as  have  been  ut- 
tered in  the  aforesaid  newspapers  and  pamphlets  to 
be  altogether  false  and  calumnious,  whether  in  con- 
tempt of  our  Holy  Father  and  of  the  Apostolic  See, 
or  the  dishonor  of  this  Holy  Synod,  and  on  the 
score  of  its  asserted  want  of  legitimate  liberty. 

"  From  the  Hall  of  the  Council,  the  i6th  day  of 
July,  1870. 

"  Philip,  Cardinal  De  Angelis,  President. 

"  Antonius,  Cardinal  De  Luca. 

"  Andreas,  Cardinal  Bilzari. 

"  Aloysius,  Cardinal  Bilio. 

"  Hannibal,  Cardinal  Capalti."* 

We  have  thus  carried  down  our  narrative  to  the 
eve  of  the  Dehnition,  and  with  one  or  two  general 
remarks  I  will  conclude  this  part  of  the  subject. 

A  strange  accusation  has  been  brought  against 
the  Council  of  the  Vatican,  or,  to  speak  more  truly, 
against  the  Head  of  the  Church,  who  summonetl 
it;  namely,  that  its  one  object  was  to  define  the 


*  Soo  Appendix,  j,.  liJ'i. 


THE  WORLD  AND   THE   COUNCIL. 


41 


Infallibility  of  the  Pope.  With  the  knowledge  I 
have,  in  common  with  a  large  part  of  the  Episco- 
pate, I  am  able  to  give  to  this  a  direct  denial.  But 
this  denial  is  not  given  as  if  the  admission  of  the 
charge  would  be  in  any  way  inconsistent  with  the 
wisdom,  dignity,  or  duty  of  the  Council.  It  is  sim- 
ply untrue  in  fact.  Even  though  it  were  true,  I 
should  have  no  hesitation  in  undertaking  to  show 
that  the  Council,  if  it  had  been  assembled  chiefly 
to  define  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff, 
would  have  been  acting  in  strict  analogy  with  the 
practice  of  the  Church  in  the  eighteen  CEcumeni- 
cal  Councils  already  held. 

Each  several  Council  was  convened  to  extin- 
guish the  chief  heresy,  or  to  correct  the  chief  evil, 
of  the  time.  And  I  do  not  hesitate  to  affirm  that 
the  denial  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff 
was  the  chief  intellectual  or  doctrinal  error  as  to 
faith,  not  to  call  it  more  than  proximate  to  heresy, 
of  our  times. 

It  was  so,  because  it  struck  at  the  certainty  of 
the  pontifical  acts  of  the  last  three  hundred  years; 
and  weakened  the  effect  of  pontifical  acts  at  this 
day  over  the  intellect  and  conscience  of  the  faith- 
ful. It  kept  alive  a  dangerous  controversy  on  the 
subject  of  Infallibility  altogether,  and  expOvSed  even 
the  Infallibility  of  the  Church  itself  to  difficulties 
not  easy  to  solve.  As  an  apparently  open  or  dis- 
putable point,  close  to  the  very  root  of  laith,  it  ex- 
posed even  the  faith  itself  to  the  reach  of  doubts. 

Next,  practically,  it  was  mischievous  beyond 
measure.  The  divisions  and  contentions  of"  Galli- 
canism"  and  "  Ultramontanism"  liave  been  a  scan- 
dal and  a  shame  to  us.     Protestants  and  unbolicv- 


42 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


l^  < 


f       1 
I 


ers  have  been  kept  from  the  truth  by  our  intestine 
controversies,  especially  upon  a  point  so  high  and 
so  intimately  connected  with  the  whole  doctrinal 
authority  of  the  Church. 

Again,  morally,  the  division  and  contention  on 
this  point,  supposed  to  be  open,  has  generated 
more  alienation,  bitterness,  and  animosity  between 
Pastors  and  people,  and  what  is  worse,  between 
Pastor  and  Pastor,  than  any  other  in  our  day.  Our 
internal  contests  proclaimed  by  Protestant  news- 
papers, and,  worse  than  all,  by  Catholic  also,  have 
been  a  reproach  to  us  before  the  whole  world. 

It  was  high  time  to  put  an  end  to  this ;  and  if 
the  Council  had  been  convened  for  no  other  pur- 
pose, this  cause  would  have  been  abundantly  suffi- 
cient ;  if  it  had  defined  the  Infallibility  at  its  outset, 
it  would  not  have  been  an  hour  too  soon  ;  and  per- 
haps it  would  have  averted  many  a  scandal  we 
now  deplore.  But  this  last  I  say  with  submission, 
for  the  times  and  seasons  of  a  Council  are  put  in  a 
power  above  our  reach. 

In  the  midst  of  all  these  graver  events  and  cares, 
there  were,  now  and  then,  some  things  which  gave 
rise  to  hearty,  and  I  hope  harmless,  amusement. 
Of  these,  one  was  what  may  be  called  the  panic 
fear  lest  the  definition  of  the  Infallibility  of  the 
Pope  should  suddenly  be  carried  by.  acclamation ; 
and  the  amusing  sclf-gratulation  of  those  who  im- 
agined that  with  great  dexterity  and  address  they 
had  defeated  this  intention.  The  acclamation,  like 
the  rising  of  a  conspiracy,  was  to  have  taken  place 
first  on  one  day,  and  then,  being  frustrated,  on  an- 
other. The  Feast  of  the  Epiphany  was  named,  then 
the  Fca3t  of  St.  Joseph,  then  the  Feast  of  the  Annun- 


■  W 


THE  WORLD   AND   THE  COUNCIL. 


43 


ciation.  But  by  the  masterly  tactics  of  certain  lead- 
ers, this  conspiracy  could  never  accomplish  itself. 
Janus  first  announced  the  discovery  of  the  plot. 
The  minds  of  men  from  that  time,  it  seems,  were 
haunted  with  it.  They  lived  in  perpetual  alarm. 
They  were  never  safe,  they  tell  us,  from  a  surprise 
which  would  create  an  article  of  faith  before  they 
could  protest.  I  refrain,  out  of  respect,  from  nam- 
ing the  distinguished  prelates  of  whom  our  anony- 
mous teachers  speak  so  freely,  when  they  affirm 
that  at  the  first  general  congregation  Papal  Infalli- 
bility was  to  be  carried  by  acclamation,  but  that 
"  the  scheme  was  foiled  by  the  tact  and  firmness 
of"  such  an,  one  ;  and  that  "a  similar  attempt  was 
projected  for  a  later  day  (March  19),  when  the 
prompt  action  of  four  Amciican  prelates  again 
frustrated  the  design."  * 

Now  the  truth  is,  that  nobody,  so  far  as  my 
knowledge  reaches,  and  I  believe  I  may  speak  with 
certainty,  ever  for  a  moment  dreamed  of  this  defi- 
nition by  acclamation.  All  whom  I  have  ever 
heard  speak  of  these  rumors  were  unfcignedly 
amused  at  them.  The  last  men  in  the  Council  who 
would  have  desired  or  consented  to  an  acclamation 
were  those  to  whom  it  was  imputed ;  and  that  for 
a  reason  as  clear  as  day.  They  had  no  desire  for 
acclamations,  because  acclamations  define  nothing. 
They  had  alreadv  had  enough  of  acclamations  in 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  which  cried  unanimously, 
"  Peter  hath  spoken  by  Leo ;"  and  in  the  Council 
of  Constantinople  which  acclaimed,  "  Peter  hath 
spoken  by  Agatho;"  and  in  the  address  of  tlie  five 


w  « 


Saturday  Review,"  Aug.  3, 1870. 


1 1 


1' 


I* 


i.ujf, 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

hundred  Bishops  at  the  centenary  of  St.  Peter,  in 
1867,  in  which  they  unanimously  declared  that 
"  Peter  had  spoken  by  Pius :"  for  they  well  knew 
that  many,  even  of  those  who  joined  most  loudly 
in  that  acclamation,  deny  that  these  words  ascribe 
infallibility  to  the  Successor  of  Peter.  Experience 
therefore  proved,  even  if  theology  long  ago  had 
not,  that  an  acclamation  is  not  a  definition;  and 
that  an  acclamation  leaves  the  matter  as  it  found 
it,  as  disputable  after  as  it  was  before.  Nothing 
short  of  a  definition  would  satisfy  either  reason  or 
conscience;  and  nothing  but  this  was  ever  for  a 
moment  thought  of. 

Such,  then,  is  a  slight  outline  of  the  internal  his- 
tory of  this  protracted  contest.  It  passed  through 
nine  distinct  phases ;  and  it  must  be  confessed  that 
they  who  desired  to  avert  the  definition  held  their 
successive  positions  with  no  little  tenacity. 

The  first  attack  came  from  the  World  without, 
in  support  of  a  handful  of  professors  and  writers, 
who  denied  the  truth  of  the  doctrine :  the  second 
position  was  to  admit  its  truth  but  to  deny  that  it 
was  capable  of  being  defined  :  the  third,  to  admit 
that  it  was  definable,  but  to  deny  the  opportune- 
ness of  defining  it :  the  fourth,  to  resist  the  intro- 
duction of  the  doctrine  for  discussion :  the  fifth,  to 
render  discussion  impossible  by  delay :  the  sixth, 
to  protract  the  discussion  till  a  conclusion  should 
become  physically  impossible  before  the  summer 
heats  drove  the  Council  to  disperse :  the  seventh, 
when  the  discussion  closed,  to  defer  the  definition 
to  the  future :  the  eighth,  after  the  definition  was 
made,  to  hinder  its  promulgation:  the  ninth  —  I 
will  not  say  the  last,  for  who  can  tell  what  may 


I 


THE  WORLD  AND   THE   COUNCIL. 


45 


still  come? — to  affirm  that  the  definition,  though 
solemnly  made,  confirmed,  and  published  by  the 
Head  of  the  Church  in  the  (Ecumenical  Council, 
and  promulgated  nrbi  et  orbi  according  to  the  tra- 
ditional usage  of  the  Church,  does  not  bind  the 
conscience  of  the  faithful  till  the  Council  is  con- 
cluded, and  subscribed  by  the  Bishops. 

This  last  is  the  only  remnant  of  the  controversy 
now  surviving.  I  can  hardly  believe  that  any  one, 
after  the  letter  of  Cardinal  Antonelli  to  the  Nunzio 
at  Brussels,  can  persist  in  this  error.  Neverthe- 
less, it  may  be  well  to  add  one  or  two  words, 
which  you  will  anticipate,  and  well  know  how  to 
use. 

I.  A  definition  of  faith  declares  that  a  doctrine 
Was  revealed  by  God. 

Are  the  faithful,  then,  dispensed  from  believing 
Divine  revelation  till  the  Council  is  concluded, 
and  the  Bishops  have  subscribed  it  ? 

I  hope,  for  the  sake  of  the  Catholic  religion  in 
the  face  of  the  English  people,  that  we  shall  hear 
no  more  of  an  assertion  so  uncatholic  and  so  dan- 


gerous. 


2.  But  perhaps  it  may  mean  that  the  Council  is 
not  yet  confirmed,  because  not  yet  concluded. 

The  Council  may  not  yet  be  confirmed  because 
not  yet  concluded  ;  but  the  Definition  is  both  con- 
cluded and  confirmed. 

The  Council  is  as  completely  confirmed,  in  its 
acts  hitherto  taken,  as  it  ever  will  or  can  be.  The 
future  confirmation  will  not  add  anything  to  that 
which  is  confirmed  already.  It  will  confirm  future 
acts,  not  those  which  are  already  perfect. 

3.  But  perhaps  some  may  have  an  idea  that  the 


46 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


question  is  not  yet  closed,  and  that  the  Council 
may  hereafter  undo  what  it  has  done.  We  have 
been  told  that  "  Its  decrees  may  have  to  be  cor- 
rected," and  that  two  years  elapsed  before  the 
CEcumenical  pretensions  of  the  Latrocinium  of 
Ephesus  were  formally  superseded.  Some  have 
called  it  "  Ludibrium  Vaticanum." 

Let  those  who  so  speak,  or  think,  for  many  so 
speak  without  thinking,  look  to  their  faith.  The 
past  acts  of  the  Council  are  infallible.  No  future 
acts  will  retouch  them.  This  is  the  meaning  of 
"  irreformable."  Infallibility  does  not  return  upon 
its  own  steps.  And  they  who  suspend  their  assent 
to  its  acts  on  the  plea  that  the  Council  is  not  con- 
cluded, are  in  danger  of  falling  from  the  faith. 
They  who  reject  the  Definitions  of  the  Vatican 
Council  are  already  in  heresy. 


\ 

1 

CHAPTER   II. 


THE  TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


I 


1 


I 


Having  so  far  spoken  on  the  less  pleasing  and  less 
vital  part  of  this  subject,  I  gladly  turn  to  the 
authoritative  acts  of  the  Council. 

The  subject  matter  of  its  deliberations  was  di- 
vided into  four  parts,  and  for  each  part  a  Deputa- 
tion of  twenty-four  Fathers  was  elected  by  the 
Council.  The  four  divisions  were,  on  Faith,  Dis- 
cipline, Religious  Orders,  and  on  Rites,  including 
the  Missions  of  the  Church. 

Hitherto,  the  subjects  of  Faith  and  Discipline 
alone  have  come  before  the  Council ;  and  of  these 
two  chiefly  the  first  has  been  treated,  as  being  the 
basis  of  all,  and  in  its  nature  the  most  important. 

In  what  I  have  to  add,  I  shall  confine  myself  to 
the  two  Dogmatic  Constitutions,  De  Fide  and  De 
Ecclcsia  Christ i!^ 

The  history  of  the  Faith  cannot  be  adequately 
written  without  writing  both  the  history  of  heresy 
and  the  history  of  definitions ;  for  heresies  are 
partial  aberrations  from  the  truth,  and  definitions 
are  rectifications  of  those  partial  errors.  But  the 
Faith  is  co-extensive  with  the  whole  Revelation  of 


*  Bee  Appendix,  p.  192,  etc. 


48 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


Truth  ;  and  though  every  revealed  truth  is  definite 
and  precise,  nevertheless,  all  are  not  defined.  The 
need  of  definition  arises  when  any  revealed  truth 
has  been  obscured  or  denied.  The  general  his- 
tory of  the  Church  will  therefore  give  the  general 
history  of  the  Faith  ;  but  the  history  of  Councils 
will  give  chiefly,  if  not  only,  the  history  of  those 
parts  of  r'^velation  which  have  been  assailed  by 
heresy  and  protected  by  definition. 

The  Divine  Tradition  of  the  Church  contains 
truths  of  the  supernatural  order  which  without 
revelation  could  not  have  been  known  to  man,  such 
as  the  Incarnation  of  God  and  the  mystery  of  the 
Holy  Trinity,  and  truths  of  the  natural  order, 
which  are  known  also  by  reason,  such  as  the  exis- 
tence of  God.  1  lie  circumference  of  this  Divine 
Tradition  is  far  wider  than  the  range  of  definitions. 
The  Church  guards,  teaches,  and  transmits  the 
whole  divine  tradition  of  natural  and  supernatural 
truth,  but  defines  only  those  pa  ■«;  of  the  deposit 
which  have  been  obscured  or  denied. 

The  eighteen  CEcumenical  Councils  of  the 
Church  have  therefore  defined  such  specific  doc- 
trines of  the  Faith  as  were  contested.  The  Coun- 
cil of  the  Vatican  has,  for  this  reason,  treated  of 
two  primary  truths  greatly  contested  but  never 
hitherto  defined,  namely :  the  Supernatural  order 
and  the  Church.  It  is  this  which  v/ill  fix  the 
character  of  the  Vatican  Council,  and  will  mark  in 
history  the  progress  of  error  in  the  Christian  world 
at  this  day. 

The  scries  of  heresy  has  followed  the  order  of 
tlie  Baptismal  Creed.  It  began  by  assailing  the 
nature  and  Unity  of  God,  the  Creator;  then  of 


i 


THE   TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


49 


1 


the  Redeemer ;  then  the  doctrine  of  the  Incarna- 
tion of  the  Godhead  and  the  Manhood  of  the  Son 
of  God  ;  then  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  and  of  the 
personaUty  and  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  To 
these  succeeded  controversies  on  sin,  grace,  and 
the  Holy  Sacraments ;  finally  the  heresies  of  the 
so  called  Reformation,  which  spread  over  what 
remained  unassailed  in  the  Catholic  Theology,  es- 
pecially the  Divine  authority  and  the  institution 
of  the  Church  itself  The  Councils  before  Trent 
have  completely  guarded  all  doctrines  of  faith 
hitherto  contested,  by  precise  definition,  excepting 
only  the  two  primary  and  preliminary  truths  ante- 
rior to  all  doctrine,  namely,  the  revelation  of  the 
supernatural  order  and  the  Divine  authority  and 
institution  of  the  Church.  To  affirm  and  to  define 
these  seems  to  be,  as  I  said,  the  mission  and  char- 
acter of  the  Vatican  Council,  and  indicates  the 
state  of  the  Christian  world  ;  because  in  the  last 
three  hundred  years  the  rapid  development  of  the 
rationalistic  principle  of  Prote^ "^antism  has  swept 
away  all  intermediate  systems  and  fragmentary 
Christianities.  The  question  is  reduced  to  a  simple 
choice  of  faith  and  unbelief,  or,  of  the  natural  or 
the  supernatural  order. 

This,  then,  is  the  starting-point  of  the  first  dog- 
matic Constitution,  De  Fide  CatJiolica.  . 

In  the  Prooemium,  the  Council  declares  that 
none  can  fail  to  know  how  the  heresies  condemned 
at  Trent  have  been  subdivided  into  a  multitude  of 
contending  sects,  whereby  Faith  in  Christ  has  been 
overthrown  in  many  ;  and  the  Sacred  Scriptures, 
which  at  first  were  avowedly  held  to  be  the  source 
and  rule  of  faith,  are  now  reputed  as  fables.    The 


50 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


I  11 


Mi 


cause  of  this  it  declares  to  be,  the  rejection  of  the 
Divine  authority  of  the  Church,  and  the  license  of 
private  judgment. 

"  Then  sprang  up,"  it  goes  on  to  say,  "  and  was 
widely  spread  throughout  the  world,  the  doctrine 
of  rationalism  or  naturalism,  which  opposing  itself 
altogether  to  Christianity  as  a  supernatural  insti- 
tution, studiously  labors  to  exclude  Christ,  our 
only  Lord  and  Saviour,  from  the  minds  of  men 
and  from  the  life  and  morality  of  nations,  and  to 
set  up  the  dominion  of  what  they  call  pure  reason 
and  nature.  After  forsaking  and  rejecting  the 
Christian  religion,  and  denying  the  true  God  and 
His  Christ,  the  minds  of  many  have  lapsed  at 
length  into  the  depth  of  pantheism,  materialism, 
and  atheism,  so  that,  denying  the  rational  nature 
of  man,  and  all  law  of  justice  and  of  right,  they 
are  striving  together  to  destroy  the  very  founda- 
tions of  human  society. 

"While  this  impiety  spreads  on  every  side,  it 
miserably  comes  to  pass,  that  many  even  of  the 
sons  of  the  Catholic  Church  have  wandered  from 
the  way  of  piety,  and  while  truth  in  them  has 
wasted  away,  the  Catholic  instinct  has  become 
feeble.  For,  led  astray  by  many  and  strange  doc- 
trines, they  have  recklessly  confused  together  na- 
ture and  grace,  human  science,  and  divine  faith,  so 
as  to  deprave  the  genuine  sense  of  dogmas  which 
the  Holy  Churcii  our  Mother  holds  and  teaches ; 
and  have  brought  into  danger  the  integrity  and 
purity  of  the  Faith." 

Such  is  the  estimate  of  the  condition  of  the 
Christian  world  in  the  judgment  of  the  Vatican 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


51 


ich 


r 


Council ;  and  from  this  point  of  sight  we  may 
appreciate  its  decrees. 

Its  first  chapter  is  of  God  the  Creator  of  all 
things.*  In  this  is  decreed  the  personality,  spiritu- 
ality and  liberty  of  God,  the  creation  of  corporeal 
and  of  spiritual  beings,  and  the  existence  of  body 
and  soul  in  man.  These  truths  may  be  thought  so 
primarj'  and  undeniable  as  to  need  no  definition. 
To  some  it  may  be  hardly  credible,  that,  at  this 
day,  there  should  exist  men  who  deny  the  existence 
of  God,  or  His  personality,  or  His  nature  distinct 
from  the  world,  or  the  existence  of  spiritual  beings, 
or  the  creation  of  the  world,  or  the  liberty  of  the 
Divine  will  in  creation.  But  such  errors  have  ex- 
isted and  do  exist,  not  only  in  obscure  and  inco- 
herent minds,  but  in  intellects  of  power  and  culti- 
vation, and  in  philosophies  of  elaborate  subtilty, 
by  which  the  faith  of  many  has  been  undermined. 

The  second  Chapter  is  on  Revelation.  It  affirms 
the  existence  of  two  orders  of  truth  :  the  order  of 
nature,  in  which  the  existence  of  God  as  the  begin- 
ning and  end  of  creatures  may  be  certainly  known 
by  the  things  which  He  has  made;  and  the  order 
which  is  above  created  nature,  that  is,  God  and  His 
action  by  truth  and  grace  upon  mankind.  The 
communication  of  supernatural  truth  to  man  is  re- 
velation; and  that  revelation  is  contained  in  the 
Word  of  God  written  and  unwritten,  or  in  the  di- 
vine tradition  committed  to  the  Church.  These 
truths,  elementary  and  certain  as  they  seem,  have 
been  and  are  denied  by  errors  of  a  contradictory 

*  The  text  of  the  Constitutions  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix, 
No.  IV. 


52 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


1 


kind.  By  some  it  is  denied  that  God  can  be  known 
by  the  Hght  of  reason ;  by  others  it  is  affirmed  not 
only  that  God  may  be  known  by  the  light  of  reason, 
but  that  no  revelation  is  necessary  for  man ;  once 
more,  others  deny  that  man  can  be  elevated  to  a 
supernatural  knowledge  and  perfection ;  again, 
others  affirm  that  he  can  attain  to  all  truth  and 
goodness  of  and  from  himself.  These  errors  also 
are  widespread ;  and  in  the  multifarious  literature 
which  Catholics  incautiously  admit  into  their 
homes  and  minds,  have  made  havoc  of  the  faith  of 
many. 

The  third  Chapter  is  on  Faith.  It  may  be  truly 
said,  that  in  this  chapter  every  word  is  directed 
against  some  intellectual  aberration  of  this  cen- 
tury. 

It  affirms  the  dependence  of  the  created  intel- 
ligence upon  the  uncreated,  and  that  this  depend- 
ence is  by  the  free  obedience  of  faith  ;  or,  in  other 
other  words,  that  inasmuch  as  God  reveals  to  man 
truths  of  the  supernatural  order,  man  is  bound  to 
believe  that  revelation  by  reason  of  the  authority 
or  veracity  of  God,  who  can  neither  deceive  nor 
be  deceived.  The  infallibihty  of  God  is  tht  aiotive 
of  faith.  And  this  faith,  though  it  be  not  formed 
in  us  by  perceiving  the  intrinsic  credibility  of  what 
we  beli.  ve,  but  by  the  veracity  of  God,  neverthe- 
less is  a  rational  or  intellectual  act,  the  highest  and 
most  normal  in  its  nature.  For  no  act  of  the  reason 
can  be  more  in  harmony  with  its  nature  than  to 
believe  the  Word  of  God.  To  assure  mankind  that 
it  is  God  who  speaks,  God  has  given  to  man  signs 
and  evidences  of  His  revelation,  which  exclude 
reasonable  doubt.    The  act  of  faith  therefore  is  not 


4 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


53 


a  blind  act,  but  an  exercise  of  the  highest  reason. 
It  is  also  an  act  not  of  necessity  but  of  perfect  free- 
dom, and  therefore  in  itself  an  act  of  normal  obedi- 
ence to  God,  and  meritorious  in  its  nature.  And 
this  act  of  faith,  in  which  both  the  intellect  and  the 
will  have  their  full  and  normal  exercise,  is  never- 
theless an  act  not  of  the  natural  order,  but  of  the 
Supernatural,  and  springs  from  the  preventing 
grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  Who  illuminates  the  in- 
telligence and  moves  the  will.  Faith  is  therefore 
a  gift  of  God,  and  a  moral  duty  which  may  be  re- 
quired of  us  by  the  commandment  of  God.     ' 

But  inasmuch  as  the  grace  of  faith  is  given  to 
man  that  he  may  believe  the  revelation  of  God,  it 
is  co-extensive  with  that  whole  revelation.  What- 
soever God  has  revealed,  man,  when  he  knows  it,  is 
bound  to  believe.  But  God  has  made  provision 
that  man  should  know  His  revelation,  because 
He  has  committed  it  to  His  Church  as  the  guar- 
dian and  teacher  of  truth.  Whatsoever,  therefore, 
the  Church  proposes  to  our  belief  as  the  Word  of 
God,  written  or  unwritten,  whether  by  its  ordinary 
and  universal  teaching,  or  by  its  solemn  judgment 
and  definition,  we  are  bound  to  believe  by  divine 
and  Catholic  faith. 

To  this  end,  God  has  instituted  in  the  world  His 
visible  Church,  one,  universal,  indefectible,  immut- 
able, ever  multiplying ;  the  living  witness  of  the 
Incarnation,  and  the  sufficient  evidence  of  its  own 
mission  to  the  world.  The  maximum  of  extriy.sic 
evidence  for  the  revelation  of  Christianity  is  the 
witness  of  the  Church,  considered  even  as  an  his- 
torical proof;  and  that  evidence  is  not  only  suffi- 
cient to  convince  a  rational  nature  that  Christianity 


54 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


is  a  Divine  revelation,  but  to  convict  of  unreason- 
able unbelief  any  intelligence  which  shall  reject  its 
testimony.  But  the  visible  Church  is  not  merely 
a  human  witness.  It  was  instituted  and  is  guided 
perpetually  by  God  Himself,  and  is  therefore  a  di- 
vine witness,  ordained  by  God  as  the  infallible  mo- 
tive of  credibility,  and  the  channel  of  His  revela- 
tion to  mankind. 

I  need  hardly  point  out  what  errors  are  excluded 
by  these  definitions.  The  whole  world  outside  the 
Catholic  Church  is  full  of  doctrines  diametrically 
contrary  to  these  truths.  It  is  affirmed  that  the 
reason  of  man  is  so  independent  of  God,  .that  He 
cannot  justly  lay  upon  it  the  obligation  of  faith ; 
again,  that  faith  and  science  are  so  identified  that 
they  have  the  same  motives,  and  that  there  is  nei- 
ther need  nor  place  in  our  convictions  for  the  au- 
thority of  God;  again,  that  extrinsic  evidence  is 
of  no  weight,  because  men  ought  to  believe  onl}'- 
on  their  own  internal  experience  or  private  inspira- 
tion; again,  that  all  miracles  are  myths,  and  all 
supernatural  evidences  useless,  because  intrinsical- 
ly incredible ;  once  more,  that  we  can  only  believe 
that  of  which  we  have  scientific  proof,  and  that  it 
is  lawful  for  us  to  call  into  doubt  the  articles  of  our 
faith  when  and  as  often  as  we  will,  and  to  submit 
them  to  a  scientific  analysis,  in  the  meanwhile  sus- 
pending our  faith  until  we  shall  have  completed  the 
scientific  demonstration. 

The  fourth  and  last  Chapter  is  on  the  relation  of 
faith  to  reason.  In  this  three  thinjrs  arc  declared  : 
first-,  that  there  arc  two  orders  ot  knowledge ;  se- 
condly, that  they  differ  as  to  their  object ;  thirdly, 
that  they  differ  as  to  their  methods  of  procedure. 


I 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


55 


f 


The  order  of  nature  contains  the  subject-matter 
of  natural  religion  and  of  natural  science.  The  or- 
der of  faith  contains  truths  which  without  revela- 
tion we  might  have  known,  though  not  certainly 
nor  easily ;  and  also  truths  which,  without  revela- 
tion, we  could  not  have  known.  Such  then  are  the 
two  objects  of  reason  and  of  faith.  The  two  meth- 
ods of  procedure  likewise  differ,  inasmuch  as  in 
the  order  of  nature  the  instrument  of  knowledo-e  is 
discovery ;  in  the  supernatural  order,  it  is  faith, 
and  the  intellectual  processes  which  spring  from 
faith. 

From  these  principles  it  is  clear  that  science  and 
faith  can  never  be  in  real  contradiction.  All  seem- 
ing opposition  can  only  be  either  from  error  as  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  or  error  in  the  assump- 
tions of  science.  Every  assertion,  therefore,  con- 
trary to  the  truth  of  an  illuminated  faith,  is  false. 
"  For  the  Church,  which,  together  with  the  Apos- 
toHc  office  of  teaching,  received  also  the  command 
to  guard  the  deposit  of  faith,  is  divinely  invested 
with  the  right  and  duty  of  proscribing  science 
falsely  so-called,  lest  any  man  be  deceived  by  phil- 
osophy and  vain  deceit."  "  For  the  doctrine  of 
Faith  ,vhich  God  has  revealed,  was  not  proposed 
to  the  minds  of  men  to  be  brought  to  perfection 
like  an  invention  of  philosophy,  but  was  delivered 
to  the  Spouse  of  Christ  as  a  divine  deposit  to  be 
•"aitlifuUy  guarded,  and  to  be  infallibly  declared." 

The  imi)ortance  of  this  first  Constitution  on 
Catholic  Faitli  cannot  be  ovcr-cstimatcd,  and,  from 
its  great  breadth,  may  not  as  yet  be  fully  perceiv- 
ed. 

It  is  the  broadest  and  boldest  affirmation  of  the 


56 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


supernatural  and  spiritual  order  ever  yet  made  in 
the  face  of  the  world ;  which  is  now,  more  than 
ever,  sunk  in  sense  and  heavy  with  materialism.  It 
declares  that  a  whole  order  of  being  and  power,  of 
truth  and  agency,  exists,  and  is  in  full  play  upon 
the  world  of  sense.  More  than  this,  that  this  super- 
natural and  spiritual  order  is  present  in  the  world, 
and  is  incorporated  in  a  visible  and  palpable  form, 
over  which  the  world  has  no  authority.  That  God 
and  His  operations  are  sensible ;  visible  to  the  eye, 
and  audible  to  the  ear.  That  they  appeal  to  the 
reason  of  man;  and  that  men  are  irrational,  and 
therefore  act  both  imprudently  and  immorally,  if 
they  do  not  listen  to,  and  believe  in  the  Word  of 
God.  It  affirms  also,  as  a  doctrine  of  revelation, 
that  the  visible  Church  is  the  great  motive  of  cred- 
ibility to  faith,  and  that  it  is  "  the  irrefragable  tes- 
timony of  its  own  divine  legation."  It  moreover 
asserts  that  the  Church  has  a  divine  commission 
to  guard  the  deposit  of  revelation,  and  '*  a  divine 
right  to  proscribe  errors  of  philosophy  and  vain 
deceit,"  that  is,  all  intellectual  aberrations  at  vari- 
ance with  the  deposit  of  revelation.  Finally,  it 
affirms  that  the  Church  has  a  divine  office  to  de- 
clare infallibly  the  deposit  of  truth. 

I  am  not  aware  that  in  any  previous  (Ecumenical 
Council  the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  and  of  its  di- 
vine and  infallible  authority,  has  been  so  explicitly 
defined.  And  yet  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  was 
not  at  that  time  engaged  upon  the  Schema  dc  Ec- 
clcsia,  which  still  remains  to  be  treated  hereafter. 
It  was  not  ^.owevcl  without  a  providential  guid- 
ance that  the  first  Constitution  on  Catholic  Faith 
was  so  shaped,  especially  in  its  closing  chapter. 


THE  TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


57 


Neither  is  it  without  a  great  significance  that  at  its 
conclusion  was  appended  a  Monitum,  in  which  the 
Roman  Pontiff  by  his  supreme  authority,  enjoins 
all  the  faithful,  Pastors  and  people,  to  drive  away 
all  errors  contrary  to  the  purity  of  the  faith  ;  and 
moreover  warns  Christians  that  it  is  not  enough  to 
reject  positive  heresies,  but  that  all  errors  which 
more  or  less  approach  to  heresy  must  be  avoided ; 
and  all  erroneous  opinions  which  are  proscribed 
and  prohibited  by  the  Constitutions  and  decrees  of 
the  Holy  See. 

When  these  words  were  written,  it  was  not  fore- 
seen that  they  were  a  preparation,  unconsciously 
made,  for  the  definition  of  the  Infallibility  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff.  If  the  first  Constitution  had  been 
designedly  framed  as  an  introduction,  it  could 
hardly  have  been  more  opportunely  worded.  It 
begins  with  God  and  His  revelation  ;  it  closes  with 
the  witness  and  office  of  the  Visible  Church,  and 
with  the  supreme  authority  of  its  Head.  The  next 
truth  demanded  by  the  intrinsic  relations  of  doc- 
trine was  the  divine  endowment  of  infallibility. 
And  when  treated,  this  doctrine  was,  contrary  to 
all  expectation,  and  to  all  likelihood,  presented  first 
to  the  Council,  and  by  the  Council  to  the  world,  in 
the  person  and  office  of  the  Head  of  the  Church. 

In  all  theological  treatises,  excepting  indeed  one 
or  two  of  great  authority,  it  had  been  usual  to 
treat  of  the  Body  of  the  Church  before  treating  of 
its  Head.  The  reason  of  this  would  appear  to  l)e, 
tliat  in  the  exposition  of  doctrine  the  logical  order 
was  the  more  obvious ;  and  to  the  faithful,  in  the 
first  formation  of  the  Church,  the  body  of  the 
Church  was  known  before  its  Head.    We  might 


»* 


58 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


k 


m 


-if  I 

"h 


have  expected  that  the  Council  would  have  fol- 
lowed the  same  method.  It  is,  therefore,  all  the 
more  remarkable  that  the  Council  inverted  that 
order,  and  defined  the  prerogative  of  the  Head  be- 
fore it  treated  of  the  Constitution  and  endowments 
of  the  Body.  And  thij,  which  was  brought  about 
by  the  pressure  of  special  events,  is  not  without 
significance.  The  Schools  of  the  Church  have  fol- 
lowed the  logical  order :  but  the  Church  in  Coun- 
cil, when  for  the  first  time  it  began  to  treat  of  its 
own  constitution  and  authority,  changed  the  meth- 
od, and,  like  the  Divine  Architect  of  the  Church, 
began  in  the  historical  order,  with  the  foundation 
and  Head  of  the  Church.  Our  Divine  Lord  first 
chose  Cephas,  and  invested  him  with  the  primacy 
over  the  Apostles.  Upon  this  Rock  all  were  built, 
and  from  him  the  whole  unity  and  authority  of  the 
Church  took  its  rise.  To  Peter  alone  first  was 
given  the  plenitude  of  jurisdiction  and  of  infallible 
authority.  Afterwards,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
was  shared  with  him  by  all  the  Apostles.  From 
him  and  through  him,  therefore,  all  began.  For 
which  cause  a  clear  and  precise  conception  of  his 
primacy  and  privilege  is  necessary  to  a  clear  and 
precise  conception  of  the  Church.  Unless  it  be 
first  distinctly  apprehended,  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  will  be  always  proportionally  obscure. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Church  does  not  determine 
the  doctrine  of  the  Primacy,  but  the  doctrine  of 
the  Primacy  does  precisely  determine  the  doctrine 
of  the  Church.  In  beginning  therefore  with  the 
Head,  the  Council  has  followed  our  Lord's  exam- 
ple, both  in  teaching  and  in  fact ;  and  in  this  will 
be  found  one  of  the  causes  of  the  singular  and  lu- 


THE   TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


59 


minous  precision  with  which  the  Council  of  the 
Vatican  has,  in  one  brief  Constitution,  exckided 
the  traditional  errors  on  the  Primacy  and  Infalli- 
bility of  the  Roman  Pontiff. 

The  reasons  which  prevailed  to  bring-  about  this 
change  of  method  were  not  only  those  w^hich  dem- 
onstrated generally  the  opportuneness  of  defining 
the  doctrine,  but  those  also  which  showed  specially 
the  necessity  of  bringing  on  the  question  while  as 
yet  the  Council  was  in  the  fulness  of  its  numbers. 
It  was  obvious  thai  the  length  of  time  consumed 
in  the  discussion,  reformation,  and  voting  of  the 
schemata  was  such,  that  unless  the  Constitution  De 
Romano  Pontificc  were  brought  on  immediately  after 
Easter,  it  could  not  be  finished  before  the  setting 
in  of  summer  should  compel  the  Bishops  to  dis- 
perse. Once  dispersed,  it  was  obvious  they  could 
never  again  re-assemble  in  so  large  a  number. 
Many  who,  with  great  earnestness,  desired  to  share 
the  blessing  and  the  grace  of  extinguishing  the 
most  dangerous  error  which  for  two  centuries  has 
disturbed  and  divided  the  faithful,  would  have  been 
compelled  to  go  back  to  their  distant  sees  and  mis- 
sions, never  to  return.  It  was  obviously  of  the  first 
moment  that  such  a  question  should  be  discussed 
and  decided,  not,  as  we  should  have  been  told,  in 
holes  and  corners,  or  by  a  handful  of  Bishops,  or 
by  a  faction,  or  by  a  clique,  but  by  the  largest  pos- 
sible assembly  of  the  Catholic  Episcopate.  All 
other  questions,  on  which  little  divergence  of  opin- 
ion existed,  might  well  be  left  to  a  smaller  number 
of  Bishops.  But  a  doctrine  which  for  centuries 
had  divided  both  Pastors  and  people,  the  defining 
of  which  was  contested  by  a  numerous  and  organ- 


6o 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


f  ! 


m 


ized  opposition,  needed  to  be  treated  and  affirmed 
b;'  the  mobt  extensive  deliberation  of  the  Bishops 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  Add  to  this,  the  many 
perils  which  hung  over  the  continuance  of  che 
Council ;  of  which  I  need  but  give  one  example. 
The  outbreak  of  a  war  might  have  rendered  the 
definition  impossible.  And  in  fact,  the  Infallibility 
of  the  Roman  Pontiff  was  defined  on  the  eighteenth 
of  July,  and  war  was  officially  declared  on  the  fol- 
lowing day. 

With  these  and  many  other  contingencies  fully 
befoie  them,  those  who  believed  that  the  definition 
was  not  oniy  opportune  but  necessary  for  the  unity 
of  the  Church  and  the  Faith,  urged  its  immediate 
discussion.  Events  justified  their  foresight.  The 
debate  was  prolonged  into  the  heats  of  July,  when, 
by  mutual  consent,  the  opposing  sides  withdrew 
from  a  further  prolonging  of  the  contest,  and  closed 
the  discussion.  If  it  had  not  been  already  protract- 
ed beyond  all  limits  of  reasonable  debate,  for  not 
less  than  a  hundred  fathers  in  the  general  and  spe- 
cial discussions  had  spoken,  chiefi}  if  not  alone,  of 
infalliblity,  it  could  not  so  have  ended.*  Both 
sides  were  convinced  that  the  matter  was  ex- 
hausted. 

We  will  now  examine,  at  least  in  outline,  the  first 
Dogmatic  Constitution  on  the  Church  of  Christ; 
and  I  will  then  confine  what  1  have  to  add  to  the 
definition  of  Infallibility;  thereby  completing  a 
part  of  the  subject  which  in  the  two  previous  Pas- 
torals it  would  have  been  premature  to  treat. 


5« 


*  During  the  session  (-f  the  council  four  hundred  and  twenty 
spr3ches  were  delivered,  of  which  nearly  ouj  fourth  were  on  the 
Infa.Iibilitv  alono. 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


d 

)S 


,t 
s 

i 


The  Prooemium  of  the  Constitution  declares  that 
the  institution  of  the  visible  Church  was  ordained 
to  preserve  the  twofold  unity  of  faith  and  of  com- 
munion, and  that  for  this  end  one  principle  and 
foundation  was  laid  in  Peter. 

The  first  Chapter  declares  the  Primacy  of  Petei 
over  the  Apostles ;  and  that  his  primacy  was  con- 
ferred on  him  immediately  and  directly  by  our 
Lord,  and  consists  not  only  in  honor  but  also  in 
jurisdiction. 

The  second  Chapter  affirms  this  primacy  of  hon- 
or and  jurisdiction  to  be  perpetual  in  the  Church  ; 
and  that  the  Roman  Pontiffs,  as  successors  of  Pe- 
ter, inherit  this  primacy ;  whereby  Peter  always 
prf  ,ldes  in  his  see,  teaching'  and  governing  the 
Universal  Church. 

The  third  Chapter  defines  the  nature  of  his  ju- 
risdiction, namely,  *  totam  plcnitudinem  hujus  su- 
premse  potestatis,"  the  plenitude  of  power  to  feed, 
rule,  and  govern  the  Universal  Church.  It  is  Miere- 
fore  jurisdiction  episcopal,  ordinary,  and  immedi- 
ate over  the  whole  Church,  over  both  pastors  and 
people,  that  is,  over  the  whole  Episcopate,  collect- 
ively and  singly,  and  over  every  particular  church 
and  diocese.  The  ordinary  and  immediate  juris- 
diction which  every  several  Bishop  in  the  Church 
exercises  in  the  flock  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
has  placed  him,  is  thereby  sustained  and  strength- 
ened. • 

From  this  Divine  primacy  three  consequences 
follow  :  the  one,  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  is  the  su- 
preme judge  over  all  the  Church,  from  whom  lies 
no  appeal ;  the  second,  that  no  power  under  God 
may  come  between  the  chief  pastor  of  the  Church 


62 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


i!  ' 


and  any,  from  the  highest  to  the  humblest,  mem- 
ber of  the  flock  of  Christ  on  earth  ;  the  third,  that 
this  supreme  power  or  primacy  is  not  made  up  of 
parts,  as  the  sovereignty  of  constitutional  states, 
but  exists  in  its  plenitude  in  the  successor  of  Peter.* 

The  fourth  and  last  Chapter  defines  the  infallible 
doctrinal  authority  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  as  the  su- 
preme teacher  of  all  Christians. 

The  Chapter  opens  by  affirming  that  to  this  su- 
preme jurisdiction  is  attached  a  proportionate 
grace,  whereby  its  exercise  is  directed  and  sus- 
tained. 

This  truth  has  been  traditionally  held  and  taught 
by  the  H0I3'  See,  by  the />ra.vis  of  the  Church,  and 
by  the  (Ecumenical  Councils,  especially  those  in 
which  the  East  and  the  West  met  in  union  together, 
as  for  instance  the  fourth  of  Constantinople,  the 
second  of  Lyons,  and  the  Council  of  Florence. 

It  is  then  declared,  that  in  virtue  of  the  promise 
of  our  Lord,  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  that  thy  faith 
fail  not,"  t  a  perpetual  grace  of  stability  in  faith 
was  divinely  attached  to  Peter  and  to  his  succes- 
sors in  his  Sec. 

The  definition  then  affirms  "that  the  Roman 
Pontiff,  when  he  speaks  c.v  cathcdray  that  is,  when  in 


*  In  order  to  fix  this  doctrine  more  exactly,  and  to  exclude  all 
possible  equivocation,  after  full  and  ample  and  repeated  discussion, 
the  words  "  aut  eura  habere  tantum  potiores  partes,  non  vero  totam 
pletiitudineni  hujus  suprenioc  potostatis,"  were  inserted  in  the  Can;)n 
appended  to  this  Chapter.  I  notice  this,  because  it  has  been  most 
untruly  and  most  invidiously  said,  that  these  words  were  interpo- 
lated after  the  discussion.  They  -Nvero  fully  and  amply  discussed, 
and  the  proof  of  the  fact  exists  in  the  shorthand  report  of  tiio 
speeches,  laid  up  in  the  Archives  of  the  Council. 

f  St.  Luke  xxii.  31,  33. 


THE  TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


^ 


discharge  of  the  office  of  Pastor  and  Doctor  of  all 
Christians,  by  virtue  of  his  supreme  Apostolic  au- 
thority, he  defines  a  doctrine  regarding  faith  or 
morals  to  be  held  by  the  Universal  Church,  by  the 
Divine  assistance  promised  to  him  in  Blessed  Pe- 
ter, is  possessed  of  that  infallibility  with  which  the 
Divine  Redeemer  willed  that  His  Church  should 
be  endowed  for  defining  doctrine,  regarding  faith 
and  morals.  And  that  therefore  such  definitions  of 
the  Roman  Pontiff  are  irreformable  of  themselves, 
and  not  from  the  consent  of  the  Church." 

In  this  definition  there  are  six  points  to  be  noted. 

1.  First,  it  defines  the  meaning  of  the  well-known 
phrase,  loqucns  ex  cathedra  ;  that  is,  speaking  from 
the  Seat,  or  place,  or  with  the  authority  of  the 
supreme  teacher  of  all  Christians,  and  binding  the 
assent  of  the  Universal  Church. 

2.  Secondly,  the  subject-matter  of  his  infallible 
teaching,  namely,  the  doctrine  of  faith  and  morals. 

3.  Thirdly,  the  efficient  cause  of  infallibility,  that 
is,  the  divine  assistance  promised  to  Peter,  and  in 
Peter  to  his  successors. 

i-  4.  Fourthly,  the  act  to  which  this  divine  assis- 
tance is  attached,  namely,  the  defining  of  doctrines 
of  faith  and  morals. 

5.  Fifthly,  the  extension  of  this  infallible  au- 
thority to  the  limits  of  the  doctrinal  office  of  the 
Church. 

6.  Lastly,  the  dogmatic  value  of  the  definitions 
ex  cathedra,  namely,  that  they  arc  in  themselves 
irreformable,  because  in  themselves  infallible,  and 
not  because  the  Church,  or  any  part  or  member  of 
the  Church,  should  assent  to  them. 

These  six  points  contain  the  whole  definition  of 


64 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Infallibility.  I  will  therefore  take  them  in  order, 
and  then  answer  certain  objections. 

I.  First,  the  definition  limits  the  infallibility  of 
the  Pontiff  to  the  acts  which  emanate  from  him  ex 
cathedra.  This  phrase,  which  has  been  long  and 
commonly  used  by  theologians,  has  now,  for  the 
first  time,  been  adopted  into  the  terminology  of 
the  Church  ;  and  in  adopting  it  the  Vatican  Coun- 
cil fixes  its  meaning.  The  Pontiff  speaks  ex  cathedra 
when,  and  only  when,  he  speaks  as  the  Pastor  and 
Doctor  of  all  Christians.  By  this,  all  acts  of  the 
Pontiff  as  a  private  person,  or  a  private  doctor,  or 
as  a  local  Bishop,  or  as  sovereign  of  a  state,  are 
excluded.  In  all  these  acts  the  Pontiff  may  be 
subject  to  error.  In  one,  and  one  only,  capacity 
he  is  exempt  from  error  ;  that  is,  when,  as  teacher 
of  the  whole  Church  in  things  of  faith  and  morals. 

Our  Lord  declared,  "  Super  cathedram  Moysi 
sederunt  scribae  et  Pharisaei : "  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees  sit  in  the  chair  of  Moses.  The  seat  or 
"  cathedra  "  of  Moses  signifies  the  authority  and 
the  doctrine  of  Moses  ;  the  cathedra  Petri  is  in  like 
manner  the  authority  and  doctrine  of  Peter.  The 
former  was  binding  by  Divine  command  and  under 
pain  of  sin,  upon  the  people  of  God  under  the 
old  law  ;  the  latter  is  binding  by  Divine  command 
and  under  pain  of  sin,  upon  the  people  of  God  un- 
der the  new. 

I  need  not  here  draw  out  the  traditional  \x^i  of 
the  term  cathedra  Petri,  which  in  St.  Cyprian,  St. 
Optatus,  and  St.  Augustine  is  employed  as  synony- 
mous with  the  successor  of  Peter,  and  is  used  to 
expi ,  ss  the  centre  and  test  of  Catholic  unity.  Ex 
cathedra  is  therefore  equivalent  to  ex  cathedra  Petri 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 

and  distinguishes  those  acts  of  the  successor  of 
Peter  which  are  done  as  supreme  teacher  of  the 
whole  Church. 

The  value  of  this  phrase  is  great,  inasmuch  as  it 
excludes  all  cavil  and  equivocation  as  to  the  acts 
of  the  Pontiff  in  any  other  capacity  than  that  of 
Supreme  Doctor  of  all  Christians,  and  in  any  other 
subject  matter  than  the  matters  of  faith  and  morals. 

II.  Secondly,  the  definition  limits  the  range,  or, 
to  speak  exactly,  the  object  of  infallibility,  to  the 
doctrine  of  faith  and  morals.  It  excludes,  there- 
fore, all  other  matter  whatsoever. 

The  great  commission  or  charter  of  the  Church 
is,  in  the  words  of  our  Lord,  "  Go  ye,  therefore, 
and  teach  all  nations  .  .  .  teaching  them  to  observe 
all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you  ;  and 
behold,  I  am  with  you  all  days,  even  to  the  con- 
summation of  the  world."* 

In  these  words  are  contained  five  points. 

1.  First,  the  perpetuity  and  universality  of  the 
mission  of  the  Church  as  the  teacher  of  mankind. 

2.  Secondly,  the  deposit  of  the  Truth  and  of  the 
commandments,  that  is,  of  the  Divine  Faith  and 
law'entrusted  to  the  Church. 

3.  Thirdly,  the  office  of  the  Church,  as  the  sole 
interpreter  of  the  Faith  and  of  the  Law. 

4.  Fourthly,  that  it  has  the  sole  Divine  jurisdic- 
tion existing  upon  earth,  in  matters  of  salvation, 
over  the  reason  and  will  of  man. 

5.  Fifthly,  that  in  the  discharge  of  this  office  our 
Lord  is  with  His  Church  always,  and  to  the  con- 
summation of  the  world. 


*  St.  Matthew  xxviii.  19,  20. 


^ 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


I 


ii  M 


The  doctrine  of  faith  and  the  doctrine  of  morals 
are  here  explicitly  described.  The  Church  is  in- 
fallible in  this  deposit  of  revelation. 

And  in  this  deposit  are  truths  and  morals  both 
of  the  natural  and  of  the  supernatural  order ;  for 
the  religious  truths  and  morals  of  the  natural  order 
are  taken  up  into  the  revelation  of  the  order  of 
grace,  and  form  a  part  of  the  object  of  infallibil- 
ity. 

I.  The  phrase,  then,  "faith  and  morals,"  signifies 
the  whole  revelation  of  faith  ;  the  whole  way  of 
salvation  through  faith ;  or  the  whole  supernatu- 
ral order,  with  all  that  is  essential  to  the  sanc- 
tification  and  salvation  of  mai.  through  Jesus 
Christ.  • 

Now,  this  formula  is  variously  expressed  by  the 
Church  and  by  theologians ;  but  it  always  means 
one  and  the  same  thing. 

The  Second  Council  of  Lyons  says,  "  If  any 
questions  arise  concerning  faith,"  they  are  to  be 
decided  by  the  Roman  Pontiff.* 

The  Council  of  Trent  uses  the  formula  "  in  things 
of  faith  and  morals,  pertaining  to  the  edification  of 
Christian  doctrine. "f  • 

Bellarminc  says,  "  in  things  which  pertain  to 
faith,"  and  again,  **  The  Roman  Pontiff  cannot  err 
in  faith  ; "  and  further  he  says,  **  Not  only  in  de- 
crees of  faith  the  Supreme  Pontiff  cannot  err,  but 
neither  (can  he  err)  in  moral  precepts  which  arc 

*  "  Si  quflo  subortaj  fucrint  qufpstionos  do  fide,  sno  (i.  c.  Rom. 
Pont.)  dclu'iit  judicio  dcfiniri." — Labbo,  Concil.  torn.  xlv.  p.  513. 
Vonico.  1731. 

f  "  III  rt>bu9  fidci  et  morum  i\d  ipdificationom  doctrlno)  Christian© 
pertiuoutium." — Lubbe,  Concil.  torn.  xx.  p.  23. 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


67 


enjoined  on  the  whole  Church,  and  which  are  con- 
versant with  things  that  are  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, or  with  those  which  are  in  themselves  good 
or  evil."* 

Gregory  of  Valentia  saj^s,  "  Without  any  restric- 
tion it  is  to  be  said,  that  whatsoever  the  Pontiff 
determines  in  controverted  matters  which  have 
respect  to  piety,  he  determines  infallibly ;  when,  as 
it  has  been  stated,  he  obliges  the  whole  Church  ;  " 
and  again,  "  Whatsoever  the  Pontiff  asserts  in  any 
controverted  matter  of  religion,  it  is  to  be  believed 
that  he  asserts  infallibly  by  his  Pontifical  authority, 
that  is,  by  Divine  assistance,"  f 

Bannez  proposes  the  thesis  in  these  words ;  "  Can 
(the  Roman  Pontiff)  err  in  defining  matters  of 
faith  ? "  t 

S.  Antoninus  says,  "  It  is  necessary  to  admit  one 
head  in  the  Church,  to  \vhom  it  belongs  to  clear  up 


*  "  In  his  quno  ad  fidcm  pertinent."  "  Pontifpx  Romnnus  non 
potest  crrnro  in  fide."  "  Non  solum  in.  docretis  fidei  erraro  non 
jjotest  Suiiinnis  Pontifcx,  sod  ncquo  in  prtrccptis  morum,  qute  toti 
Ecclcsi.nc  imrsciibuutur,  ct  qua)  in  rebus  nccessariis  ad  salutcm,  \o] 
in  iiH  qn.'o  [lor  ho  1iona  vol  mala  sunt,  vorsantur." — Hollarmine,  De 
Itomano  Pontificc,  lib.  iv.  cajjp.  iii.  v.  pp.  795,  804.    Yonico,  1509. 

f  "  Absquo  nlla  rostrictione  dicondum  ost,  quicquid  Pontifox  in 
robufci  coutrovorsis  ad  jnetatcm  spcctautibus  dotorminnt,  int'allibilitor 
ilium  dotorminaro,  quand(»,  ut  oxpositum  est,  univorsam  Ecclosiam 
obli^at."  Grep.  do  Valentia,  0pp.  torn.  iii.  disp.  i.  qu.  i.  "  Do 
Objocto  Fidei."  puuct.  vii.  s.  40,  ]).  813.     Inpfolstadt,  1595. 

"  Quo'cunKiue  i'ontifex  in  aliqua  re  do  roli^iono  controvorsa  sic 
assorit,  ccrta  fide  crodondum  est  ilium  infullibiliter,  xitpote  ex  auc* 
toritato  Poutilioia,  i.e.  ox  Divina  assistentia,  asserero." — Ibid.  s.  89, 
p.  808. 

I  "  An  poBsit  in  rebus  fidei  definieudis  erraro  V'—Tn  Sum.  S.  T?u 
Q  3.  q.  1.  art.  10. 


63 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


55    p 


doubts  concerning  whatsoever  relates  to  faith, 
whether  speculative  or  practical."  * 

Suarez  says,  "  It  is  a  Catholic  truth,  that  the 
Pontiff  defining  ex  cathedra  is  a  rule  of  faith  which 
cannot  err,  whensoever  he  proposes  authoritatively 
anything  to  be  believed  of  faith  in  the  whole 
Church."  t 

And  in  his  treaties  "  De  Religione,"  tract  ix.  I. 
3,  c.  4,  n.  5,  speaking  of  the  Bull  of  Gregory  XIII., 
**  Ascendentc  Domino,"  by  which  it  is  declared 
that  simple  vows  constitute  a  true  religious  state, 
he  says  that  the  truth  of  this  definition  is  "  alto- 
gether infallible,  so  that  it  cannot  be  denied  with- 
out error.  The  reason  is,  because  the  sentence  of 
the  Pontiff  in  things  which  pertain  to  doctrine 
contains  infallible  certainty  by  the  institution  and 
promise  of  Christ,  *  I  have  prayed  for  thee.'  "  Af- 
terwards he  adds,  "  The  providence  of  Christ  our 
Lord  over  His  Church  would  be  greatly  diminished 
if  He  should  permit  His  Vicar,  in  deciding  such 
questions  ex  cathedra^  to  fall  into  error."  :j: 


*  "  Oportot  cnim  in  Ecclosia  poncro  unum  cnput.  nd  quod  portinot 
declarare  ilia  qua)  sunt  tHibia  circa  (luipcunuiuo  iid  (idem  pcrtiiu'iitia, 
Bivc  Biut  spt'culativa  sivo  agibillu." — Summa  Thcol.  p.  ill.  tit.  32,  c.  3. 

f  "  Veritas  Catholica  est  Pontificein  definientem  (^x  cathedra  esse 
rejxulam  fidei,  quoB  erraro  non  potest  quando  aliiuid  authentico 
proponit  toti  Ecclesiic,  tanquam  do  fide  credenduin." — Suarez,  l)e 
Fide,  di8p.  v.  sec.  8,  torn.  xiii.  p.  04.     Mentz,  1(123. 

^  "  Oninino  infallibilnm,  ita  ut  sine  erroro  in  fide  neparl  non  poa- 
pit.  Ratio  est,  (juia  Hentontia  I'ontificis  in  /as  qiiw  ad  dorfrinam 
pertinent,  iniiillihilein  continct  oertitudineni  ex  Christi  institutiono 
et  i)ormisHi()iie :  '  Ego  ro^mvl  pro  te.'  .  .  .  Vuldo  autein  diminuta 
fidBset  Cliristi  I>iiniini  i)r()vi(lentia  circii  Huuin  I'cclcsiani  si  in  decl- 
dendin  talil)U8(iu(rs(li)Mil)iis(«x  cathedra  Vicariuni  Huuni  hihi  pennit- 
torut." — Id.  Dc  RdiyioiiC  Hoc.  Jcsu,  lib.  iii.  c.  4,  n.  5,  toiu.  xvii.  p.  437. 


THE  TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 

Melchior  Canus  says,  "  The  Roman  Pontiff  suc- 
ceeds by  Divine  right  to  Peter  both  in  firmness  of 
faith  and  in  deciding  controversies  of  religion;" 
and  again,  "  The  Roman  Pontiff  in  ending  contro- 
versies of  faith  cannot  err."* 

S.  Alphonsus  affirms,  "  When  the  Pope  speaks  as 
universal  Doctor,  ex  cathedra,  that  is,  by  the  su- 
preme authority  to  teach  the  Church,  dehvered  to 
Peter,  in  deciding  controversies  of  faith  and  morals, 
he  is  altogether  infallible. "f 

Hervasus  says,  "  The  authority  of  declaring 
doubtful  points  in  such  matters  belongs  to  the  Pope, 
that  is,  in  things  pertaining  to  the  natural  or  divine 
law ;"  and  afterwards  he  adds,  "  That  his  declaration 
ought  to  be  held  as  true,  so  that  it  is  not  lawful  to 
hold  or  to  opine  the  contrary.":}: 

Gregory  de  Valentia  adds,  "  In  him,  whom  the 
whole  church  is  bound  to  obey  in  those  things 
which  pertain  to  the  spiritual  health  of  the  soul, 
whether  they  concern  faith  or  morals,  there  is  in- 
faUible  authority  for  the  judging  questions  of  faith." 
Again :  "  Christ  willed  that  after  the  death  of  Peter, 


*  "  lloinanus  Pontifex  Potro  ct  eii  fidoi  firmitato  ct  in  coinponen- 
dis  rcUgioniH  controveraiis  divino  juro  succcdit.  liomanus  Pontifex 
in  fidci  coiitroversiis  finioudis  errure  non  potest." — Melchoir  Canus, 
Dc  loc.  Theol.  lib.  vi.  c.  4  and  7. 

f  "Quiim  Papa  loquitur  tanquara  Doctor  universalis  ox  cathedra, 
uempo  ex  potostato  suprenia  tradita  Petro  docondi  Ecclesiam  in 
controVcrKiis  fidei  et  morum  decernendis,  est  onniino  infallibilis. — S. 
.Alphons.  Li^jf.  0pp.  torn.  i.  lib.  1.  tract.  3,  p.  1JJ5.     Mijchlin,  1845. 

I  "Ad  I*>ipiun  iHTtinet  auctoritas  dcclarandi  dubia  in  talibus,  hoc 
t'Ht,  in  iKTlincntiljiiH  ad  jiin  lutturalo,  rd  diinniiiii,"  &p. —  Depot. 
iV^w,  ii.  col.  4.  .  .  .  "Quod  deolaratio  Hua  dcljinit  luibi;ri  ut  vera 
ita  (piod  non  liceat  oppositnm  tciicre  vcl  opinari" — De  Potest,  Pa- 
pali,  apud  S.  Anton.  Uoccab.  Bibl.  Po)it{f.  torn.  v.  p.  00  . 


^Q 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


some  one  should  be  acknowledged  by  the  Church 
in  perpetual  succession  in  Peter's  place :  on  whom 
Christ  Himself  should  confer  supreme  authority  as 
He  did  on  Peter,  of  ordaining  the  matters  which  re- 
late to  faith,  and  to  other  things  pertaining  to  the 
salvation  of  the  faithful.''  And  further  he  says, 
"  that  He  (Christ)  may  confer  on  him  the  authority, 
which  Peter  had,  that  is,  that  by  a  certain  law  he  may 
so  ordain  as  to  co-operate  Avit'  him  by  a  peculiar  as- 
sistance, in  rightly  appointing  such  things  in  doctrine 
and  morals  7is  pertain  to  the  good  estate  of  the  Church.'" 
And  still  more  explicitly  in  another  place  he  says, 
"  It  is  not  to  be  denied,  that  what  has  been  said  of 
the  infallible  certainty  of  the  Pontifical  definiti  mis, 
holds  good,  first,  in  those  things  which  the  Pontiff 
has  proi)osed  to  the  faithful,  in  deciding  doctrinal 
controversies  and  exterminating  errors,  as  revealed  of 
God,  and  to  be  believed  by  faith.  But,  forasmuch 
as  the  Church  is  ahva}  s  bound  to  hear  its  Pastor, 
and  the  Divine  Scripture  declares  absolutely  the 
Church  to  be  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth  (i 
Tim.  iii.),  and  therefore  it  cannot  ever  err  as  a 
whole,  it  cannot  be  doubtful,  that  the  authority  of 
the  Pontiff  is  infallible  in  all  other  things  which  re- 
gard piety,  and  the  whole  Church.  Nor  do  I  think 
that  this  can  be  denied  without  error."  Gregory 
then  applies  this  to  the  canonization  of  Saints,  and 
concludes :  "  This  certainty  surely  rests  ui)on  the 
same  promises  of  God,  by  which  we  have  seen  that 
it  can  rever  be  that  the  whole  Church  should  err  in 
matters  of  religion.''''''' 


♦  "Ciil  EcoloHiutota  ()l)ti'ini)«mro  tciustur,  in  iis  robuH,  quro  ad 
»piritualem  animce  salutem  pertinent,  eivo  illu)  lidcm  eivo  moroB 


THE  TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


;i 


Here  we  have  the  single  word  faith  put  to  stand 
for  the  whole  revealed  order  of  salvation:  for 
morals  are  contained  under  faith ;  and  this,  which  is 
the  ultimate  object  of  infalhbility,  is  expressed  in 
the  following  and  various  formulas :  i.  Concerning 
faith.  2.  In  things  of  faith  and  morals.  3.  Thiis^s 
which  pertain  to  faith.  4.  Things  necessary  to  sal- 
vation. 5.  Precepts  of  morals  binding  the  whole 
Church.  6.  Things  pertaining  to  piety.  7.  Things 
of  religion.  8.  Things  of  faith  speculative  and 
practical.  9.  Things  pertaining  to  doctrine.  10. 
Controversies  of  religion.  11.  Things  pertaining 
to  the  natural  and  Divine  law.  12.  Things  pertain- 
ing to  the  spiritual  health  of  souls.  13.  And  to  the 
salvation  of  the  faithful.  14.  To  the  good  estate  of 
the  Church.  15.  The  deciding  of  controversies  and 
the  extermination  of  errors.  16.  Things  which  re- 
gard piety  and  the  whole  Church.  17.  Matters  of 
religion. 

These  might  be  greatly  multiplied.  They  will, 
however,  suffice  to  show  how  wide  and  general  is 
the  simple  formula  "in  taith  and  morals,"  which  is 


concernant,  in  co  auctoritas  est  infallibilis  ad  fidcl  quocstiones  dijvidi- 
candttH." — Gregory  do  Valuntia,  disj).  1.  q.  1,  "  DoObjecto  Fiuei,"  p. 
vil.  q.  5  8.  27,  p.  338.    Iiigolstadt,  15<J5. 

"  Voluit  ChriHtus  ut  Tetro  vita  defuncto  alicjuis  perpotua  sorio 
SUCccBsionis  in  locnm  Petri  ab  Ecclosia  rociperotur,  cui  Christus  ipse 
auc'toritatcni  supreinam  eicut  Tetro  conferret,  do  lido  et  aliis  robus 
ea  constituendi  (iiuc  ad  salutem  fidclinm  pcrtineant."  Ibid  h.  85,  p. 
375.  ..."  Ut  is  [C'liriBtusl  illi  conlbrat  auctoritatem  <iuani  Potrus 
habiiit,  lioc  est,  ut  ci;rta  lejro  statuat,  ]H'Culiari  quadam  aHsistentia 
cum  00  concurrcre  ad  ca  in  doctrlna  ct  nu)ril)us  recto  constituoiida 
qu«)  ad  l.o/iuiii  L'crlmit  stutuin  pcrtincuiit." — Ibid  b,  130,  p.  370. 

"  >i()i\  (ht  ncffanduni,  quin  quod  dictum  est  do  iutallibili  cortitu- 
dlue  dolinilionum  PontificiB,  imprimiH  locum  hal)eat,  in  lis  quuB  I'ou- 


72 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


: 


i 

.1 


I.:i  I  :-, 


the  traduionary  expression  of  the  object  of  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  Church. 

It  is  clear  that  these  phrases  are  all  equivalent. 
They  are  more  or  less  explicit,  but  they  contain  the 
same  ultimate  meaning,  namely,  that  the  Church 
has  an  infallible  guidance  in  treating  of  all  matters 
of  faith,  morals,  piety,  and  the  general  good  of  the 
Church. 

The  object  of  infallibility,  then,  is  the  whole  re- 
vealed Word  of  God,  and  all  that  is  so  in  contact 
with  revealed  truth,  that  without  treating  of  it,  the 
Word  of  God  could  not  be  guarded,  expounded, 
and  defended.  As,  for  instance,  in  declaring  the 
Canon  and  authenticity  and  true  interpretation  of 
rioly  Scripture,  and  the  like. 

Further,  it  is  clear  that  the  Church  has  an  infalli- 
ble guidance,  not  only  in  all  matters  that  are  re- 
vealed, but  also  in  all  matters  which  are  opposed  to 
revelation.  For  the  Church  could  not  discharge  its 
office  as  the  Teacher  of  all  nations,  unless  it  were 
able  with  infallible  certainty  to  proscribe  doctrines 
at  variance  with  the  word  of  God. 

From  this,  again,  it  follows  that  the  direct  object 

tifex  ad  doctrinre  controvorsias  finiondas  orroresquo  PXtcniiinnndoB 
fldeliuiu  proposuit,  tanquam  a  Deo  revclata  et  crodondo  ox  fide 
Ctetorum,  quoniam  Pastorcm  suum  Bcmpi-r  audirc  tent'tur  Eoclosia, 
et  Ecch'siain  divina  Scriptura  absolute  jjio'dicat  oHse  columuain  et 
firmamentuin  vi'i'itutis  (1  Tim.  ill.),  idooquo  nunquamctTarc  t  ta  po 
test ;  dubium  esso  non  debet  qiiin  in  aliia  tiuoeiue  relmsoinnibiiH  as- 
sorondis,  qua'  ad  pictatem  spectent,  et  Ecclesiam  totam  cnncenient.in- 
fallil)ili8  hit  PontificiB  auctoritas.  Nequo  sane  arbltror,  hoc  absciuu 
orroro  iiegari  poase.  .  .  Qutcsano  certitudo  iisdcm  illis  Dei  proinia- 
Bionibus  iiititur  ex  qiiibus  comportum  habemus  nunqiiam  esse  fu- 
turuin  ut  univerea  Ecclesia  iu  rebus  leligionis  fullatur." — Ibid  s.  40, 
p.  800. 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


73 


of  infallibility  is  the  Revelation,  or  Word,  of  God  ; 
the  indirect  object  is  whatsoever  is  necessary  for  its 
exposition  or  defence,  and  whatsoever  is  contrari- 
ant  to  the  Word  of  God,  that  is,  to  faith  and  morals. 
The  Church  having  a  divine  office  to  condemn  c- 
rors  in  faith  and  morals,  has  therefore  an  infalHble 
assistance  in  discerning  and  in  proscribing  false 
philosophies  and  false  vScience.*  Under  this  head 
comes  the  condemnation  of  heretical  texts,  such  as 
the  Th  '"'"  Chapters  proscribed  in  the  Fifth  Council, 
the  "  Augustinus  "  of  Jansenius,  and  the  like ;  and 
also  censures,  both  greater  and  less,  those,  for  in- 
stance, of  heresy  and  of  error,  because  of  their 
contrariety  to  faith  ;  those  also  of  temerit}'-,  scandal, 
and  the  like,  because  of  their  contrariety  to  morals 
at  least. 

2.  It  is  therefore  evident  that  the  doctrinal  au- 
thority of  the  Church  is  not  confined  to  matters  of 
revelation,  but  extends  also  to  positive  truths  which 
are  not  revealed,  whensoever  the  doctrinal  author- 
ity of  the  Church  cannot  be  duly  exercised  in  the 
promulgation,  explanation,  and  defence  of  revela- 
tion without  judging  and  pronouncing  on  such 
matters  and  truths.  This  will  be  clear  from  the 
following  propositions : 

(i.)  First,  the  doctrinal  authority  of  the  Church 
is  infallible  in  all  matters  and  truths  which  are  ne- 
cessary to  the  custody  of  the  Depositum. 


*  Porro  Ecclcsin,  qure  una  cum  apoBtolico  munero  docendi,  man- 
datum  ncccpit  fhlci  doi)<)»itHm  custodiendi,  jus  etium  et  offlciam 
divinitua  liabet  falsi  nominis  soientiam  proscribendi,  no  quis  dcci- 
l>iutur  i)er  pliilosophiaiu,  et  inanera  fallaciara  (Colosa.  ii.  8.) — (Jo)i- 
stitulio  Prima  de  Fi^o  CatlwUca,  cap.  iv.  Do  Fido  ot  Rationo.  Ap« 
pondix,  No.  IV. 


I 


1i 


I 


74 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


This  extends  to  certain  truths  of  i  iti  ral  science, 
as,  for  e;  aiplo,  the  cxi-^tc  ic*  "f  r  ;  Sc^.m  ;e;  ana  to 
truths  of  the- natural  reason,  Sc  .h  'a;^  hat  the  soul  is 
immaterial;  that  it  is  "the  for.  ot  ''  e  body;"* 
and  the  like.  It  extends  also  to  certain  truths  of 
the  supernatural  order,  which  are  not  revealed  ;  as, 
the  authenticity  of  certain  texts  or  versions  of  the 
Holy  Scripture. 

The  Council  of  Trent  by  a  dogmatic  decree  de- 
clared, under  anathema,  that  the  Vulgate  edition  is 
authentic.  Now  this  is  a  definition  or  dogmatic 
judgment,  to  be  believed  on  the  infallible  authority 
of  the  Church.  But  this  truth  or  fact  is  not 
revealed. 

(2.)  Secondly,  there  are  truths  of  mere  human 
history,  which  therefore  are  not  revealed,  without 
which  the  deposit  of  the  Faith  cannot  be  taught  or 
guarded  in  its  integrity.  For  instance,  that  St. 
Peter  was  Bishop  of  Rome  ;  that  the  Council  of 
Trent  and  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  are  OEcu- 
menical,  that  is,  legitimately  celebrated  and  con- 
firmed ;  that  Pius  IX.  is  the  successor  of  Peter  by 
legitimate  election.  These  truths  are  not  revealed. 
They  have  no  place  in  Scripture  ;  and  except  the 
first,  they  have  no  place  in  tradition  ;  yet  they  are 
so  necessary  to  the  order  of  faith,  that  the  whole 
would  be  undermined  if  they  were  not  infallibly 
certain.  But  such  infallible  certainty  is  impossible 
by  means  of  human  history  and  human  evidence 
alone.  Ic  is  created  only  by  the  infallible  author- 
ity of  the  Church. 

(3.)  Thirdly,  there  arc  truths  of  interpretation, 


*  Concil.  Later.  V.  Bulla  Apontolici  Rcgiminis. 


T'^E   T,/0   CONSTITUTIONS. 


75 


not  revealed,  witho'it  wh"ch  the  deposit  of  the  faith 
cannot  be  preserved. 

The  Council  of  Trent*  declares  that  to  the 
Church  it  belongs  to  judge  of  the  true  sense  and 
interpretation  of  Holy  Scripture.  Now  the- sense 
of  the  Holy  Scripture  is  two-fold  ;  namely,  the  lit- 
eral and  grammatical,  or,  as  it  is  called,  the  scjisus 
quis  ;  and  th^  theological  and  doctrinal,  or  the  sctisiis 
qualis.  The  Church  judges  infallibly  of  both.  It 
judges  of  the  question  that  such  and  such  words  or 
texts  have  such  and  such  literal  and  grammatical 
meaning.  It  judges  also  of  the  conformity  of  such 
meaning  with  the  .  ..lO  of  faith,  or  of  its  contradic- 
tion to  the  same.  The  former  is  a  question  of  fact, 
the  latter  of  dogma.  That  the  latter  falls  within  the 
infallible  judgment  of  the  Church  has  been  denied 
by  none  but  heretics.  The  former  has  been  denied, 
for  a  time,  by  some  who  continued  to  be  Catholics  : 
for  this  is,  in  truth,  the  question  of  dogmatic  facts. 
But  the  Janscnists  never  ventured  to  extend  their 
denial  to  the  text  of  Scripture,  though  the  argu- 
ment is  one  and  the  same.  The  Church  has  the 
same  assistance  in  judging  of  the  grammatical  and 
theological  sens?  of  texts,  whether  sacred  or  simply 
human  :  and  has  exercised  it  in  all  ages. 

For  instance :  Pope  Hormisdas  f  says,  "  The  ven- 
erable wisdom  of  the  Fathers  providently  defined 
by  faithful  ordinance  what  doctrines  are  Catholic : 
fixing  also  certain  parts  of  the  ancient  books  to  be 
received  as  of  authority,  the  Holy  Ghost  so  in- 
structing them  ;    lest  the  reader,  indulging  in  his 


*  Scss.  iv. 
\  IIormisdflD  Ep.  LXX.  Labbe,  ConciL.  torn.  v.  p.  664 


76 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


1 

11 

I 
■ 

1 

\ 

own  opinion  .  .  .  should  assert  not  that  which  tends 
to  the  edification  of  the  Church,  but  what  his  own 
pleasure  had  C(  nceived." 

Pope  Nicholas  I.  *  writes,  "  by  their  decree  (i.  e. 
that  of  the  Roman  Pontiffs)  the  writings  of  other 
authors  are  approved  or  condemned,  so  that  what 
the  Apostolic  See  approves,  is  to  be  held  at  this 
day,  and  what  it  has  rejected,  is  to  be  esteemed  of 
no  effect,"  &c. 

Pope  Gelasius,  in  a  Council  held  at  Rome,  de- 
creed as  follows:  "Also  the  writings  of  Caecilius 
Cyprianus,  Martyr,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  are  in  all 
things  to  be  received  ;  also  the  writings  of  Blessed 
Gregory,  Bishop  of  Nazianzum  ....  also  the  writ- 
ings and  treatises  of  all  orthodox  Fathers,  who  in 
nothing  have  deviated  from  the  fellowship  of  the 
Holy  Roman  Church,  nor  have  been  separated 
from  its  faith  and  preaching ;  but  have  been  par- 
takers by  the  Grace  of  God  of  its  communion  unto 
the  last  day  of  their  life,  we  aecree  to  be  read."  f 

Turrecremata  says,  "  It  is  to  be  believed  that  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is  directed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  in 
things  of  faith,  and  consequently  in  these  cannot 
err;  otherwise  any  one  might  as  easily  say  that 
there  was  error  in  the  choice  (or  discernment)  of 
the  four  Gospels,  and  of  the  canonical  epistles,  and 
of  the  books  of  other  doctors,  approving  some,  and 
disapproving  others ;  which,  however,  we  read,  and 
as  is  evident,  was  determined  by  the  Roman  Pon- 
tiffs  Gregory  and   Gelasius."  %     Again,  he   says, 

*  Nic.  Ep.  ad  Univ.  Episc.  Gallioe,  Labbe,  Condi  torn.  x.  p,  282. 

t  Labbe,  Condi,  torn,  v  p.  387. 
X  Turrecremata,  Be  potestate  Papali,  lib.  ii.  cap.  112,  in  BibL 
M.  Rocabcrti,  torn.  xiii.  p.  463. 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


17 


"The  sixth  kind  of  Catholic  truths  are  those  which 
are  asserted  by  doctors,  approved  by  the  Universal 
Church  for  the  defence  of  the  faith  and  the  confu- 
tation of  heretics.  .  .  .  This  is  ev'dent :  for  since 
the  Church,  which  is  directed  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
approves  certain  doctors,  receiving  their  doctrine 
as  true,  it  necessarily  follows  that  the  doctrine  of 
such  (writers),  delivered  by  way  of  assertion,  and 
never  otherwise  retracted,  is  true  and  ought  to  be 
held  by  all  the  faithful  with  firm  belief,  in  so  far  as 
it  is  received  by  the  Universal  Church ;  otherwise, 
the  Universal  Church  would  appear  to  have  erred 
in  approving  and  accepting  their  doctrine  as  true, 
which  however  was  not  true."  * 

And  Stapleton  lays  down,  "  Bishops  .  .  .  when 
they  treat  of  the  Scripture  as  doctors,  have  not  this 
certain  and  infallible  authority  of  which  we  are 
speaking :  until  their  treatises,  approved  by  sacred 
authority,  are  commended  by  the  Church  as  Cath- 
olic and  certainly  orthodox  interpretation,  which 
Gelasius  first  did,"  f  &c. 

I  will  give  one  more  example,  as  it  is  eminently 
in  point. 

The  Church  has  approved  in  a  special  manner 
the  works  of  St.  Augustine  as  containing  the  true 
doctrines  of  grace  against  the  Pelagian  and  semi- 
Pelagian  heresies. 

In  this  particular,  his  works  have  been  declared 
to  be  orthodox  by  St.  Innocent  I.,  St.  Zosimus,  St. 
Boniface  I.,  St.  Celestinc,  St.  Hormisdas,  St.  Felix 
IV.,  and  Boniface  II.  For  that  reason  Clement 
XL  justly  condemned  the  book  of  Launoy  called 

*  Ibid.  lib.  iv.  p.  ii.  c.  ii.  383. 
t  Controv.  Fidci,  lib.  x.  c.  ii.  p.  355,  ed.  Paris,  1620. 


78 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


;rl.l. 


"  Veritable  tradition  de  r%lise  sur  la  Prddestina^ 
tion  et  la  Grace,"  &c.,  as  "at  least  impious  and 
blasphemous,  and  injurious  to  St.  Augustine,  the 
shining  light  and  chief  doctor  of  the  Catholic 
Church ;  as  also  to  the  Church  itself  and  to  the 
Apostolic  See."  * 

Now,  in  this  approbation  the  Church  approved 
the  doctrine  of  St.  Augustine,  not  only  in  the  sensiis 
qualis  but  also  in  \}ciQsensiLS  qtiis  ;  that  is,  it  approved 
not  only  a  possible  theological  sense  which  was  or- 
thodox, but  the  very  and  grammatical  sense  of  the 
text.  It  was  therefore  a  true  doctrinal  judgment 
as  to  a  dogmatic  fact. 

For,  as  Cardinal  Gerdil  argues,  the  doctrine  of 
St.  Augustine  was  proposed  by  the  Church  as  a 
rule  of  faith  against  the  Pelagian  and  semi-Pelagian 
errors.  **  When  it  is  said  that  the  doctrine  of  St. 
Augustine  in  the  matter  of  grace  was  adopted  by 
the  Church,  it  must  not  be  understood  in  the  sense 
as  if  St.  Augustine  had  worked  out  a  peculiar  sys- 
tem for  himself,  which  the  Church  then  adopted  as 
its  own.  ....  "  The  great  merit  of  St.  Augustine  is, 
that  with  marvellous  learning  he  expounded  and 
defended  the  antient  belief  of  the  faithful."  f  The 
Church  infallibly  discerned  the  orthodoxy  of  his 
writings,  and  approving  them,  commended  them 
as  a  rule  of  faith. 

If  the  Church  have  this  infallible  discernment  of 
the  meaning,  grammatical  and  theological,  of  or- 
thodox texts,  it  has  codem  inUiitu  the  same  discern- 

»  Brev.  "Gxm.  siatt,"  28  Jan.  1704.    D'Argentro,  CoUec.  Jud.  torn, 
vi.  p.  444. 

t  Saggio  d'  Mniz.  tcol.  "  De  gratia,"  ed.  Rom.  p.  189. 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


79 


ment  of  heterodox  texts.  For  the  universal  prac- 
tice of  the  Church  in  commending  the  writings  of 
orthodox,  and  of  condemning  those  of  heterodox 
authors,  is  a  part  of  the  d'^ntrinal  authority  of  the 
Church  in  the  custody  and  defence  of  the  faith. 
It  falls  therefore  within  the  limits  of  its  infallibil- 
ity. 

The  commendation  of  the  works  of  St.  Augus- 
tine, and  the  commendation  of  the  Thalia  of  Arius 
at  Nicsea,  of  the  Anathematisms  of  Nestorius  at 
Ephesus,  and  of  the  Three  Chapters  of  Ibas,  Theo- 
dore, and  Theodoret,  in  the  Second  Council  of 
Constantinople,  all  alike  involved  a  judgment  of 
dogmatic  facts. 

The  subterfuge  of  the  Jansenists  as  to  the  literal 
meaning  of  "Augustinus"  came  too  late.  The 
practice  of  the  Church  and  the  decrees  of  Councils 
had  already  pronounced  its  condemnation. 

(4.)  What  has  here  been  said  of  the  condemna- 
tion of  heretical  texts,  is  equally  applicable  to  the 
censures  of  the  Church. 

The  condemnation  of  propositions  is  only  the 
condemnation  of  a  text  by  1  agments. 

The  same  discernment  which  ascertains  the  or- 
thodoxy of  certain  propositions,  detects  the  hetero- 
doxy of  those  which  are  contradictory.  And  in 
both  processes  that  discernment  is  infallible.  To 
define  doctrines  of  faith,  and  to  condemn  the  con- 
tradictions of  heresy,  is  almost  one  and  the  same 
act.  The  infallibility  of  the  Church  in  condemn- 
ing heretical  propositions  is  denied  by  no  Cath- 
olic. 

In  like  manner,  the  detection  and  condemnation 
of  propositions  at  variance  with  theological  cer- 


1 

I 

■ 

i  1 

•'^'  ! 

A\ ' 

ll 

uLil 

l<     *t 


80 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


tainty  is  a  function  of  the  same  discernment  by 
which  theological  certainty  is  known.  But  the 
Church  has  an  infallible  discernment  of  truths 
which  are  theologically  certain  ;  that  is,  of  conclu- 
sions resulting  from  two  premises  of  which  one  is 
revealed  and  the  other  evident  by  the  light  of 
nature. 

In  these  two  kinds  of  censures,  at  least,  it  is 
therefore  of  faith  that  the  Church  is  infallible. 

As  to  the  other  censures,  such  as  temerity,  scan- 
dal, offence  to  pious  ears,  and  the  like,  it  is  evident 
that  they  all  relate  to  the  moral  character  of  pro- 
positions. It  is  not  credible  that  a  proposition 
condemned  by  the  Church  as  rash  should  not  be 
rash,  and  as  scandalous  should  not  be  scandalous, 
or  as  offensive  to  pious  ears  should  not  be  such, 
and  the  like.  If  the  Church  be  infallible  in  faith 
and  morals,  it  is  not  to  be  believed  that  it  can  err 
in  passing  these  moral  judgments  on  the  ethical 
character  of  propositions.  In  truth,  all  Catholic 
theologians,  without  exception,  so  far  as  I  know, 
teach  that  the  Church  is  infallible  in  all  such  cen- 
sures.* They  differ  only  in  this :  that  some  declare 
this  truth  to  be  of  faith,  and  therefore  the  denial  of 
it  to  be  heresy  ;  others  declare  it  to  be  of  faith  as  to 
the  condemnation  of  heretical  propositions,  but  in 
all  others  to  be  only  of  theological  certainty  ;  so 
that  the  denial  of  it  to  be  not  heresy,  but  error. 

To  deny  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  in  the 
censures  less  than  for  heresy,  is  held  to  be  heretical 
by  De  Panormo,  Malderus,  Coninck,  Diana,  Ovie- 


*  Of  course,  I  am  not  speaking  of  writers  whoso  work?  arc  under 
ceusuro. 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


$1 


by 
:he 


IS 


do,  Amici,  Matteiicci,  Pozzobonelli,  Viva,  Nannetti. 
Murray  calls  it  objective  heresy.  Grifiini,  Herincx, 
Ripalda,  Ferraris,  and  Reinerding  do  not  decide 
whether  it  be  heretical,  erroneous,  or  proximate  to 
error.  Cardenas  and  Turrianus  hold  it  to  be  er- 
roneous ;  Anfossi,  erroneous,  or  proximate  to  error. 
De  Lugo  in  one  place  maintains  that  it  is  erroneous  ; 
in  another,  that  to  deny  the  infallibility  of  the  Church 
in  the  condemnation  of  erroneous  propositions,  is 
heresy.*  All,  therefore,  affirm  the  Church  in  pass- 
ing such  censures  to  be  infallible. 

The  infallibility  of  the  Church  in  all  censures  less 
than  heresy  may  be  proved  from  the  Acts  of  the 
Council  of  Constance.  In  the  eleventh  article  of 
the  Interrogatory  proposed  to  the  followers  of 
Huss   are   included   condemnations    of   all   kinds. 

*  Do  Panormo,  Scrutinium  Dortrinarum,  cap,  iii.  art.  xiii.  num. 
7  sqq.  p.  190,  Home,  170!) ;  Diaiui,  0pp.  torn.  ix.  Do  infall.  Rom. 
Pont.  ro8()l.  X.  num.  8  8(iq.  p.  2G'2,  Venice,  1G98  ;  Aniici,  Curma 
Tlicologicus,  torn.  iv.  Do  Fide,  ilisp.  vii.  num.  55,  p.  140,  Douay, 
1041 ;  Matteucci,  Opua  Dofimatic.  De  Controv.  Fidci,  vii.  cap.  iii. 
num.  33,  p.  359,  Venice,  1755  ;  Viva,  Theses  Damnativ,  (lua^st.  pro- 
drom.  num.  xviii.  ]).  10,  I'adua,  1737  ;  Murray,  J)c  KcrUt.ia,  tom.  iii. 
fasc.  i.  p.  220,  Dul)lin,  1805  ;  Herincx,  Suiiiin.  Thcvl.  Schul.  it  Moral. 
dub.  ix.  num.  98,  p.  180,  /. ntwerp,  1GG3  ;  Kipalda,  tom.  iii.  disp.  i. 
Bcct.  7,  num.  59,  p.  10,  Colo^  no,  1048  ;  FerrariH,  UibHothcc.  Canonic. 
tom.  vi.  Bub.  V.  Prop.  Damn.  lum.  37,  p.  505,  Jtomo,  1789  ;  Koiror- 
din^,  Thcul.  Fuialamcntal.  tract,  i.  num.  408,  p.  237,  MiiuHter,  1804; 
Cardenas,  Ci'im  Theo!or/ica,  dis.  pn^rm.  num.  140,  p.  35,  Cologne, 
1090 ;  Turrianus,  Select.  DUput.  Theol.  pars  i.  disp.  xxx.  dul).  3,  p. 
140,  Lyons,  1034;  A nibssi, /)(/'<  .y^«  dell'  "  Axictorcvi  Fidci,"  lett.  x. 
tom.  ii.  p.  141,  Home,  1810;  De  liUfjfo,  J)e  Virtute  Fidei,  tom.  iii. 
disp.  XX.  Hoct.  3,  n\im.  109,  p.  324,  and  num.  113-117,  ]).  325,  Venice, 
1751.  For  tlie  sumnuiry  and  for  the  references  to  Pozzolionelli, 
Malderus,  Coninelt,  Oviedo,  Nannetti  and  (Irillini,  I  am  indebted  to 
an  unpublislied  worlf.  of  Fr.  Uruuniello  of  the  cougreg-ation  of  13ar- 
nabitcs  in  Homo. 


82 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


1  i\-> 


M  '1 


They  were  asked  whether  they  believed  the  ar- 
ticles of  Wickliffe  and  Huss  to  be  *'  not  Catholic, 
but  some  of  them  notoriously  heretical,  some  er- 
roneous, others  temarious  and  seditious,  others 
offensive  to  pious  ears."*  Martin  V.,  therefore,  in 
the  Bull  "  Inter  cunctos  "  requires  belief,  that  is, 
interior  assent,  to  all  such  condemnations  made  by 
the  Council  of  Constance,  which  therein  extended 
its  infallible  jurisdiction  to  all  the  minor  censures, 
less  than  that  of  heresy. 

In  like  manner,  again,  in  the  Bull  "Auctorem 
Fidei,"  the  propositions  condemned  as  heretical  are 
very  few,  but  the  propositions  condemned  as  er- 
roneous, scandalous,  offensive,  schismatical,  injur- 
ious, are  very  numerous. 

During  the  last  three  hundred  years,  the  Pon- 
tiffs have  condemned  a  multitude  of  propositions 
of  which  perhaps  not  twenty  were  censured  with 
the  note  of  heresy. 

Now  in  every  censure  the  Church  proposes  to 
us  some  truth  relating  to  faith  or  morals ;  and 
whether  the  matter  of  such  truths  be  revealed  or 
not  revealed,  it  nevertheless  so  pertains  tofailh  and 
morals  that  the  deposit  could  not  be  guarded  if 
the  Church  in  such  judgments  were  liable  to  error. 

The  Apostle  declares  that  "  the  Church  is  the 
pillar  and  ground  of  the  Truth. "f  On  what  au- 
thority these  words  can  be  restricted  to  revealed 

*  "  Utrum  crednt  sontonfium  8acri  ConstnnticMisia  conrilii,  .  .  . 
scilicet  qiuul  KUpradidi  45  articuli  Jonnnis  VVicliff,  vt  Joannis  Huss 
tri^inta,  noii  Buut  Catliolici ;  Hed  quidam  ox  eis  sunt  notorio  lifrro- 
tici,  quidaiu  (.Troiu'i,  nlii  tenicrarii  vt  Bi'dltiobi,  alii  piarum  auriiim 
olIlnBivi."— ].abbi>,  Concil.  torn.  xvi.  p.  104. 

t  1  Tim.  iii.  15. 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


83 


ar- 
lic, 
er- 
lers 
,  in 
is, 
by 
cd 


j 


truth  alone,  I  do  not  know.  I  know  of  no  com- 
mentator, ancient  or  modern,  who  so  restricts 
them.  On  the  other  hand  St.  Peter  Damian,  Six 
tus  v.,  Ferro,  Cardinal  de  Lugo,  Gregory  de  Val- 
entia,  expressly  extend  these  words  to  all  truths 
necessary  to  the  custody  of  the  deposit. 

This  doctrine  is  abundantly  confirmed  by  the 
following  declarations  of  Pius  IX.  "  For  the 
Church  by  its  Divine  institution  is  bound  with  all 
diligence  to  guard  whole  and  inviolate  the  deposit 
of  Divine  faith,  and  constantly  to  watch  with  su- 
preme zeal  over  the  salvation  of  souls,  driving 
away  therefore,  and  eliminating  with  all  exactness, 
all  things  which  arc  either  contrary  to  faith  or  can 
in  any  way  bring  into  peril  tin;  salvation  of  souls. 
Wherefore  the  Church,  by  the  power  committed 
to  it  by  its  Divine  Author,  has  not  only  the  right 
but  above  all  the  duty,  of  not  tolerating  but  of 
proscribing  and  of  condemning  all  errors,  if  the 
intc  rity  of  the  faith  and  the  salvation  of  souls 
should  so  require.  On  all  philosophers  who  desire 
to  remain  sons  of  the  Church,  and  on  all  philoso- 
l)hy,  this  duty  lies,  to  assert  nothing  contrary  to 
the  teachings  of  the  Church,  and  to  retract  all  such 
things  when  the  Church  shall  so  admonish.  The 
oi)ini()n  which  teaches  contrary  to  this  we  pro- 
nounce and  declare  altogether  erroneous,  and  in 
the  highest  degree  injurious  to  the  faith  of  the 
Church,  and  to  its  authority."* 

From  all  that  has  been  said,  it  is  evident  that  the 
Church  claims  no  jurisdiction  over  the  jn-ocesses 

*  Litterro  Pii  IX.,  "Gravissiinas  iuter,"  ad  Archiep.  Monac.  et 
FriHiiiR.  Doe.  1«03. 


84 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


of  philosophy  or  science,  except  as  they  bear  upon 
revealed  truths  ;  nor  does  it  claim  to  intervene  in 
philosophy  or  science  as  a  judge  or  censor  of  the 
principles  proper  to  such  philosophy  or  science. 
The  only  judgment  it  pronounces  regards  the  con- 
formity or  variance  of  such  processes  of  the  human 
intelligence  with  the  deposit  of  faith,  and  the  prin- 
ciples of  revealed  morality  ;  that  is,  in  order  lo  the 
end  of  the  infallible  office,  namely,  the  guardian- 
ship of  Divine  revelation. 

I  will  not  here  attempt  to  enumerate  the  subject- 
matters  which  full  within  the  limits  of  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Church.  It  lielo^gc  to  the  Church 
alone  to  determine  the  limits  of  its  own  infallibility. 
Hitherto  it  has  not  done  so  except  by  its  acts,  and 
from  the  practice  of  the  Church  we  may  infer  to 
what  matter  its  infallible  discernment  extends.  It 
is  enough  for  the  present  to  show  two  things  : 

1.  First,  that  the  inflillibility  of  the  Church  ex- 
tends, as  we  have  seen,  directly  to  the  whole  mat- 
ter of  revealed  truth,  and  indirectly  to  all  truths 
which  though  not  revealed  are  in  such  contact 
with  revelation  that  the  deposit  of  faith  and  morals 
cannot  be  guarded,  expounded,  and  defentled  with- 
out an  infallible  discernment  of  such  unrevealed 
truths. 

2.  Secondly,  that  this  extension  of  the  infallibility 
of  the  Church  i:,,  hv  t!*--'  unanimous  teaching  of  all 
theologians,  at  leas^  ti;colt>^:^ically  certain;  and,  in 
the  judgment  of  the  'onjority  of  theol-  gians,  cer- 
tain by  the  ctriaial''  of  laith. 

Such  is  the  ti -i(iitic<nal  doctrine  respecting  the 
infallibilit'  of  the  Cli  arh  in  faith  and  morals.  IJy 
the  dciinition  of  th-  VMn.vai  Council,  what  is  tra- 


THE  TWO  CONSTITDTIOIsS. 


85 


ditionally  believed  by  all  the  faithful  in  respect  to 
the  Church  is  expressly  declared  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff.  But  the  definition  of  the  extent  of  that  in- 
fallibility, and  of  the  certainty  on  which  it  rests,  in 
matters  not  revealed,  has  not  been  treated  as  yet, 
but  is  left  for  the  second  part  of  the  "  Schema  De 
Ecclesia." 

III.  Thirdly,  the  definition  declares  the  efficient 
cause  of  infallibility  to  be  a  Divine  assistance  pro- 
mised to  Peter,  and  in  Peter  to  his  successors. 

The  explicit  promise  is  that  of  our  Divine  Lord 
to  Peter.  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith 
fail  not,  and  thou  bning  once  converted,  confirm 
thy  brethren."'^ 

The  implicit  promise  is  in  the  words  "  On  this 
rock  I  will  build  my  Church,  and  the  Gates  of 
IIcU  shall  not  prevail  against  it."t 

The  traditional  interpretation  of  these  promises 
is  precise. 

The  words,  "  Ego  rogavi  pro  te,  iit  non  deficiat 
fides  tua,  et  tu  aliquando  convcrsus  confirma  fra- 
tres  tuos,"  arc  interpr'jtcd,  by  both  Fathers  and 
Councils,  of  the  perpetual  stability  of  Peter's  faith 
in  his  see  and  his  successors ;  and  of  this  assertion 
I  give  the  following  proofs. 


St.  Ambrose,  a.d.  397,  in  his  treatise  on  Faith, 
says,  Christ  "  said  to  Peter,  1  have  prayed  for  thee, 
that  thy  faith  fail  not.  Was  I  le  not  therefore  able 
to  confirm  the  faith  of  him  to  wlu)m  by  His  own 
authority  He  gave  the  kingdom  ?  whom  he  pointed 


*  St,  T.uko  xxii.  8a. 


f  St.  Mtttth.  xvl.  18. 


I 


86 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


out  as  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  when  He 
called  him  the  Rock  ?  "* 

St.  John  Chrysostom,  A.l).  dfi-j,  in  his  commen- 
tar3ron  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  writes,  '*  He  (i.  e. 
Peter)  takes  the  lead  in  the  matter,  as  he  was  him- 
self entrusted  with  the  care  of  all.  For  Christ  said 
to  him,  Thou,  being  converted,  confirm  thy  brcth- 
ren."t 

St.  Augustin'v  A.D.  430,  in  his  conmicntary  on 
the  words  of  Psalm  cxviii.  43,  "  And  take  not  Thou 
the  word  of  truth  utterly  out  of  my  mouth,"  says, 
"  Therefore  the  whole  body  of  Christ  speaks  ;  that 
is  the  universality  of  the  Holy  Church.  And  the 
Lord  Himself  said  to  Peter,  1  have  prayed  for  thee, 
that  thy  faith  fail  not,  that  is,  that  the  word  of 
truth  bo  :m  t  utterly  taken  out  oi  thy  mouth. ":|: 

St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  A.D.  44.4,  in  his  commen- 
:ary  on  St.  Luke,  says,  "  Tlic  J.  rd,  when  He 
hinted  at  the  denial  of  His  discijile  and  said.  \  have 
prayed  for  tiiee,  that  th)-  faith  fail  not,  immediately 
utters  a  >vord  of  coiiSv'dation,  thou  bcini^  con- 
verted, co'i'irm  thy  br.jthren  ;  that  is,  be  the  con- 


*  IlaboH  in  ovnuQjoHo  quia  IN'tro  dixit,  Ilo^rivvi  ])ri)  to  ut  noii 
<l('fu'i:it  fides  tiia. — Er^o  cui  propria  nuctorilatc  rcfxiuiiu  (lal)at,  liujiis 
fiilfm  firiuarc  nor.  pott'rat, ;  ;!U('m  cum  lu'traui  dixit  (inuanu'iituiu 
Ecclosi.x' indicavit  V — St.  Anil)r(jHo  Ik,  Fidc,Y\\>.  iv.  cap.  v.  toui.  iii. 
p.  072,  ed.  Uou.  Venice,  1701. 

+  W{iC,)Ti\v  7k)v  TTpuyiinrnr  niOrvre'i,  utr  nvTur  Truvrnr  lyxriQinOrlr,  ttqu^ 
Vh()  Torrnv  f]nn>  o  X(>mr'')(;  •  \\(il  ail  Torp  l-ninTptipnc  nr')i(>ii:<n>  ruir  u(h:7.- 
(poi'x  aov. — St.  Joann.  Clirys.   Opp.  torn.  ix.  p.  52(>,  od.  Hon.  Paris,  17;U. 

I  Totuni  itn<]U(!  corpus  ChriHti  loijuitur,  id  ost  F.ccIoHia?  sanctio 
univorhitas  —  Kt  ipsi^  I'oiniuurt  ad  I'otruni,  liogavi,  in(['ut,  pro  t(!,  no 
dofiiiat  fidi;s  tua ;  hoc  ost  no  auforatur  ox  oro  tuo  vorbuni  voritatis 
UH(iuo  valdo.--  St.  Aiigustin.  Knarratio  in  Psnlmos,  torn.  iv.  p.  1310. 
ed.  Bon.  Paris,  1081, 


THE  TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


87 


firmer  and  teacher  of  those  who  came  to  Me  by 
faith* 

St.  Leo  the  Great,  A.  D.  460,  in  a  discourse  on  the 
anniversary  of  his  election  to  the  Pontificate,  says, 
"  If  anything  in  our  time  and  by  us  is  well  admin- 
istered and  riglitly  ordained,  it  is  to  be  ascribed  to 
his  operation  and  to  his  government,  to  whom  it 
was  said,  '  Thou  being  converted,  confirm  thy 
brethren,'  and  to  whom  after  His  resurrection,  in 
answer  to  his  threefold  declaration  of  everlasting 
love,  the  Lord  with  mystical  meaning  thrice  said, 
*  Feed  my  sheep.*  "f 

St.  Gelasius,  A.  I).  496,  writes  to  Ilonorius,  Bishop 
of  Dahnatia,  "  Thougli  w^e  arc  hardly  able  to  draw 
breath  in  the  manifold  difficulties  of  the  times ;  yet 
in  the  government  of  the  Apostolic  See  we  unceas- 
ingly have  in  hand  the  care  of  the  whole  fold  of  the 
Lord,  which  was  committed  to  blessed  Peter  by  the 
voice  of  our  ^Saviour  Himself,  *  And  thou  being  con- 
verted, confirm  thy  brethren,'  and  again,  *  i^ter, 
lovest  thou  Me  ?  Feed  My  sheep.'  ":{; 

*  'O  fih'Toi  Kvpioc  Ti/v  Tov  iinOi]Tov  ujivticnv  aivi^ilitrvog  ft'  ojt;  lipij,  I6e- 
i/Oi/v  rrri^il  aov  iva  fiii  tii?i7rti  ;/  TTinTtc  oov,  i!n<jn'i>ti  na  axi>i]/ta  Tor  T/'/t;  tg- 
l>ai<'/ i/oeiof;  /lojoi',  K(ii  0//T/,  Kru  av  ttote  tTtar^j/i/'Hf  nrijiii^ov  Toit;  di)f:?.- 
ipovg  aov  '  Tovrtari  yevoO  ari/giy/Kt  Kul  ihiViiTKa'/.n(;  riov  (Ud,  iriareor  z^in- 
aii'ivTuv  f/ioi. — St.  Cyrill.  Alex.  Comment,  in  Luc.  xxii.  torn.  v.  p.  910, 
cd.  Mi^iu\  PariH,  1848. 

f  Tantuiii  potciitiiim  dcdit  v\  qucin  totlus  lurlcsiic  ])rin('ij)oin 
It'cit,  ut  fci  quid  iitiam  iiostris  tciuporibus  \'vvU\  per  iics  aftitur  icc- 
toqi'j  dlHpunitur  illiiH  operibuH  illiussit  gubcrnnculis  deputanduni, 
ciii  dictuiii  I'st,  Et  tu  convorsua  confiniia  fiativH  tiios  ;  et  cui  jKjst 
rcHsiirfctioiicjii  sinmi  DoiuiniH  ad  trinam  a'tcriii  anioris  jjrnft'ssioii- 
I'lii  my.stica  iiisimiatioiic  tcr  dixit,  I'a.scc  ovo.s  mcas. — St.  Loo,  sonn, 
iv.  cap.  iv.  toni.  i.  p.  IC,  cd.  ijallcriui,  Wnlco,  IToU. 

X  Licot  iiitiT  varias  toniirirum  dillicultates  vix  ro8j)iraro  valou- 
imiH,  pro  B(;diB  tuiiicii  apoBtolino  uiodcraiiiinii  tolluH  oviiis  doininid 


i 


t 


'* 


it-;F  'I 


8S 


ITATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Pelagiti»lllr  il-  J^'-  ^>  i«  IJ^^^  manner  writes  to 
the  Bishops  of  Iitili^*'For  yon  kno«r  how  the  Lord 
in  the  gospel  decfcWW^  Simon,  Swnon,  behold 
Satan  has  desi^  '  yfm  fhat  he  m\^\^  sift  you  as 
wheat,  but  I  have  pray^.:  *hc  Fatl)-^r  for  thee,  that 


ng  converted,  confirm 

the  trudi   ca««ot  be 

F-eter  eve*'  be  shaken 


thy  faith  fail  not,  and  tli 
thy  brethren.     See,  bel 
filsified,  nor  can  the  failh 
or  changed."* 

St.  Gregory  the  Great,  A,  g^  404',  in  Ms  cele- 
brate .  letter  to  Maurice,  Emp«^«»$r  (/  the  East, 
says,  "  For  it  is  clear  to  all  who  k'  ow  tl"*«  Gospel, 
that  the  care  of  the  whole  Church  >  cown-mitled 
to  the  Apostle  St.  Peter,  prince  ot  .  he  Apos- 
tles. For  to  him  it  is  said,  *  Peter,  lovcbi  v  me?' 
Feed  My  sheep.'  To  him  it  is  said,  v  -''kl, 
Satan  has  desired  to  sift  you  as  wheat:  but  ,  .-..iiv-^ 
prayed  for  thee,  Peter,  that  thy  faith  fail  not,  and 
thou  being  once  converted,  confirm  thy  bretluxn.' 
To  him  it  is  said,  'Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this 
rock  I  will  build  My  church.'  "f 

curam  siae  cessatione  tractantcs,  qua?  beato  Petro  ealvatorls  ipsius 
nofitri  voco  delegata  est,  Et  tu  conversus  onfirnia  f'ratrog  tuos;  ct 
item,  Putri',  ninas  me?  pascc  ovcs  iiu-as.— St.  <;elas.us,  opist.  v.;  iu 
Labbe,  Concil.  torn.  v.  p.  '2W,  Vciiicr,  1728. 

*  Nostis  enim  in  eTangelio  domiuum  proclamantcni,  Simon, 
Simon,  eocc  Satanas  L'Xi)etivit  vos,  ut  cribrnrot  eicut  triticum,  (>}xo 
ftutem  rojjavi  pro  tc  I'atnnu,  ut  non  deficiat  fidfH  tan,  et  tu  couvor- 
sus  coufinna  I'ratros  tuos.  Considerate,  carissinii.quia  vorltasnuMi- 
tiri  non  potuit,  noc  fides  I'etii  in  .Tternuia  quas^sari  poterit  vel 
niiitari.— i*ela^aus.  II.  epist.  v.  in  Labbe,  ConHl.  torn.  vi.  p.  G'li). 

f  Cunctis  enim  Evangelium  8cientil)U9  liquet,  quod  voco  domin- 
ica  sancto  et  omnium  ajmstolorum  Petro  I'riucipi  Aik)b  'o  totiiis 
Ecde.sia)  cura  commissa  est.  Ipsi  quii)pe  dicitur,  Petro,  as  nic? 
pasce  oves  nieas.  Ipsi  dicitur,  Ecce  Satanas  expetiit  cr  --e  vos 
Bicut  triticut ;  ct  ego  pro  te  rogavi,  Petro,  ut  nna  deficit       .   ,  tua  \ 


to 
.rd 
Id 
as 
at 
m 

Ml 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS.  §$ 

Stephen,  Bishop  of  Dori,  A.  D.  649,  at  a  Lateran 
Council  under  Martin  I.  says,  in  a  libcllas  siipplcx  or 
memorial  read  and  recorded  in  the  acts,  "  Peter  the 
Prince  of  the  Apostles  was  first  commanded  to  feed 
the  sheep  of  the  Catholic  Church,  when  the  Lord 
said,  *  Peter,  lovest  thou  Me?  Feed  My  sheep." 
And  again,  he  chiefly  and  especially,  having  a  faith 
firm  above  all,  and  unchangeable  in  our  Lord  God, 
was  found  worthy  to  convert  and  to  confirm  his 
fellows  and  his  spiritual  brethren  who  were 
shaken."^" 

Pope  St.  Vitalian,  A.  D.  669,  says,  in  a  letter  to 
Paul,  Archbishop  of  Crete,  "  What  things  we  com- 
mand thee  and  thy  Synod  according  to  God  and  for 
the  Lord,  study  at  once  to  fulfil,  lest  we  be  com- 
pelled to  bear  ourselves  not  in  mercy  but  according 
to  the  power  of  the  sacred  canons,  for  it  is  written  ; 
IFhe  Lord  said,  '  Peter,  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  that 
thy  faith  fail  not,  and  thou  being  once  converted, 
confi-rm  thy  brethren.'  And  again,  '  Whatsoever 
'^ou,  Peter,  shall  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in 
lieaven  an<ri  whatever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth  shall 
Ibe  loosed  in  3*eaven.'  "f 


aikiuftutki  coawft^rstiiB  coT&rma  fattres  tuos.    Ipsi  dicitfla*,  Tu  es 
'•"'iiw  et  sHp»^  haiv  -^^watroi.  «h!«.— St-  Gregor.  E'j^ist.  lib.  r.  ep.  xx. 

i.>i'imu8  jusHus  est  ov«« 

JMRTO,  amas  u»»>  ?    Pat«o 

lurotam  ycsc  oinni- 

iMMlilfllciMt  fidein, 


f'rtrtii»«i««ir  J8c<*l«'giir    ruw  9 

bus  liabeiiH  'm.  DonfiMMi 

convc'rtcru  itfSffuMaKlo  4»8  'ei»<rinur«»  <tx 

P|)iri:ales  meruit  fraifcM*. — JaMlg.  C'lwrf. 

f  C^uc  prxcipinuw  titoi 
tu)r(iui3  Hj'nodo,  stud**  ili»eo 
itur  Bed  uucuudciu  virUMiu 


!,^   ! 


90 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


The  quotations  ^iven  in  the  Pastoral  Letter  of 
last  year,  united  with  these,  afford  the  following  re- 
sult. The  application  of  the  promise  Ego  rogavi 
pro  tc,  &c.,  to  the  infallible  faith  of  Peter  and  his 
successors,  is  made  by  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Augustine, 
St.  Leo,  St.  Gelasius,  Pelagius  II.,  St.  Gregory  the 
GreiiL,  otepiien  Bishop  of  Dori  in  a  Lateran  Coun- 
cil, St.  Vitalian,  the  Bishops  of  the  IV.  Qicumeni- 
cal  Council  A.  D.  451,  St.  Agatho  in  the  VI.  a.  d. 
680,  St.  Bernard  A.  D.  11 53,  St.  Thomas  Aquinas 
A.  D.  1274,  St.  Bonaventure  A.  D.  1274:  that  is,  this 
interpretation  is  given  by  three  out  of  the  four  doc- 
tors of  the  Church,  by  six  Pontiffs  down  to  the 
seventh  century.  It  was  recognized  in  two  CEcu- 
menical  Councils.  It  is  explicitly  declared  by  the 
Angelic  Doctor,  who  may  be  taken  as  the  exponent 
of  the  Dominican  school,  and  by  the  Seraphic  Doc- 
tor, who  is  hkewise  the  witness  of  the  Franciscan  ; 
and  by  a  multitude  of  Saints.  This  catena,  if  con- 
tinued to  later  times,  might,  as  all  know,  be  indefi- 
nitely prolonged. 

The  interpretation  ,by  the  Fathers  of  the  words 
"  On  this  rock,"  &c.,  is  fourfold,  but  all  four  inter- 
pretations are  no  more  than  four  aspects  of  one  and 
the  same  truth,  and  all  are  necessary  to  complete  its 
full  meaning.  They  all  implicitly  or  explicitly  con- 
tain the  perpetual  stability  of  Peter's  faith.  It 
would  be  out  of  place  to  enter  upon  this  here.  It 
is  enough  to  refer  to  Ballerini  Dc-  vi  ct  rationc  Pri- 
ma tus,  where  the  subject  is  exhausted. 

Scrii)tum  namquo  est,  Doniinus  inquit,  Petro,  rop^avi  pro  to  ut  n 
doficeret  fides  tua  ;  et  tu  aliquando  conversus  couHrma  fratres  tiios. 
Et   rursuin,   Quo.lcunquo  li^avcris,  etc.— St.  Vitalian,  cpist.  i.  iu 
Labbo,  Concil.  toiu.  vii,  p.  400. 


THE  TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


91 


In  these  two  promises  a  divine  assistance  is 
pledged  to  Peter  and  to  his  successors,  and  that  di- 
vine assistance  is  promised  to  secure  the  stability 
and  indefcctibility  of  the  Faith  in  the  supreme  Doc- 
tor and  Head  of  the  Church,  for  the  general  good 
of  the  Church  itself. 

It  is  therefore  a  cJiarisma,  a  grace  of  the  super- 
natural order,  attached  to  the  Primacy  of  Peter 
which  is  perpetual  in  his  successors. 

I  need  hardly  point  out  that  between  the  char- 
isma, or  gratia  gratis  data  of  infallibility  and  the 
idea  of  impeccability  there  is  no  connection.  I 
should  not  so  much  as  notice  it,  if  some  had  not 
strangely  obscured  the  subject  by  introducing  this 
confusion.  I  should  have  thought  that  the  gift  of 
prophecy  in  Balaam  and  Caiaphas,  to  say  nothing 
of  the  powers  of  the  priesthood,  which  are  the  same 
in  good  and  bad  alike,  would  have  been  enough  to 
make  such  confusion  impossible. 

The  preface  to  the  Definition  carefully  lays  down 
that  infallibility  is  not  inspiration.  The  Divine  as- 
sistance by  which  the  Pontiffs  are  guarded  from 
error,  when  as  Pontiffs  they  teach  in  matters  of  faith 
and  morals,  contains  no  new  revelation.  Inspira- 
tion contained  not  only  assistance  in  writing  but 
sometimes  the  suggestions  of  truth  not  otherwise 
known.  The  Pontiffs  are  witnesses,  teachers,  and 
judges  of  the  revelation  already  given  to  the 
Church  ;  and  in  guarding,  expounding,  and  de- 
fending that  revelation,  their  witness,  teaching  and 
judgment,  is  by  Divine  assistance  preserved  from 
error.  This  assistance,  like  the  revelation  which  it 
guards,  is  of  the  supernatural  order.  They,  there- 
lore,  who  argue  against  the  infallibility  of  the  Pon- 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


I 


^ 


1.0 


I.I 


11.25 


bills    |2.5 

ta  1^    12.2 

u    ,_ 

UUU 

m 

U    11.6 


VI 


n 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WIST  MA!N  STRUT 

WnSTM.NY.  USIO 

(716)172-4503 


:U   ■' 


92 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


tiff  because  he  is  an  individual  person,  and  still 
profess  to  believe  the  infallibility  of  Bishops  in 
General  Councils,  and  also  of  the  Bishops  dispersed 
throughout  the  world,  because  they  are  many  wit- 
nesses, betray  the  fact  that  they  have  not  as  yet 
mastered  the  idea  that  infallibihty  is  not  of  the  order 
of  nature,  but  is  of  the  order  of  grace.  In  the  order 
of  nature,  indeed,  truth  may  be  found  rather  with 
the  many  than  with  the  individual,  though  in  this 
the  history  of  mankind  would  give  a  host  of  con- 
trary examples.  But  in  the  supernatural  order,  no 
such  argument  can  have  place.  It  depends  simply 
upon  the  ordination  of  God ;  and  certainly  neither 
in  the  Old  Testament  nor  in  the  New  have  we  ex- 
amples of  infaUibiHty  depending  upon  number. 
But  in  both  we  have  the  example  of  infallibility  at- 
taching to  persons  as  individuals ;  as  for  instance 
the  Prophets  of  the  old  and  the  Apostles  of  the  new 
law.  It  is  no  answer  to  say  that  the  Apostles  were 
united  in  one  body.  They  were  each  one  possessed 
of  that  which  all  possessed  together.  To  this  may  be 
also  added  the  inspired  writers,  who  were  pre- 
served from  error  individually  and  personally,  and 
not  as  a  collective  body.  The  whole  evidence  of 
Scripture,  therefore,  is  in  favor  of  the  communi- 
cation of  Divine  gifts  to  individuals.  The  objection 
is  not  scriptural  nor  Catholic,  nor  of  the  supernat- 
ural order,  but  natural,  and,  in  the  last  analj^sis, 
rationalistic. 

IV.  Fourthly,  the  Definition  precisely  determines 
the  acts  of  the  Pontiff  to  which  this  Divine  assist- 
ance is  attached ;  namely,  '*  in  doctrina  dc  fide  vcl 
vwribus  dcfiiiicnda^'  to  the  defining  of  doctrine  of 
faith  and  morals.  .  ■ 


THE   TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


93 


The  definition,  therefore,  carefully  excludes  all 
ordinary  and  common  acts  of  the  Pontiff  as  a 
private  person,  and  also  all  acts  of  the  Pontiff  as  a 
private  theologian,  and  again  all  his  acts  which  are 
not  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals ;  and  further,  all 
acts  in  which  he  does  not  define  a  doctrine,  that  is, 
in  which  he  does  not  act  as  the  supreme  Doctor  of 
the  Church  in  defining  doctrines  to  be  held  by  the 
whole  Church. 

The  definition  therefore  includes,  and  includes 
only,  the  solemn  acts  of  the  Pontiff  as  the  supreme 
Doctor  of  all  Christians,  defining  doctrines  of  faith 
and  morals,  to  be  held  by  the  whole  Church. 

Now  the  word  doctrine  here  signifies  a  revealed 
truth,  traditionally  handed  down  by  the  teachi^ 
authority,  or  magistcriiun  infalhbile,  of  the  Church  ; 
including  any  truth  which,  though  not  revealed,  is 
yet  so  united  with  a  revealed  truth  as  to  be  insepa- 
rable from  its  full  explanation  and  defence. 

And  the  word  definition  here  signifies  the  precise 
judgment  or  sentence  in  which  any  such  traditional 
truth  of  faith  or  morals  may  be  authoritatively  for- 
mulated ;  as,  for  instance,  the  consubstantiality  of 
the  Son,  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost  by  one 
only  Spiration  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  the 
Immaculate  Conception,  and  the  like. 

The  word  "  definition  "  has  two  senses,  the  one 
forensic  and  narrow,  the  other  wide  and  common  ; 
and  this  in  the  present  instance  is  more  correct. 
The  forensic  or  narrow  sense  confines  its  meaning 
to  the  logical  act  of  defining  \iy  genus  and  differentia. 
But  this  sense  is  proper  to  dialectics  and  disputa- 
tions, not  to  the  acts  of  Councils  and  Pontiffs.  The 
wide  and  common  sense  is  that  of  an  authoritative 


m 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


termination  of  questions  which  have  been  in  doubt 
and  debate,  and  therefore  of  the  judgment  or  sen- 
tence thence  resulting.  When  the  second  Council 
of  Lyons  says,  "  Si  quce  subortx  fuerint  fidei  quass- 
tiones  suo  judicio  debere  definiri,"  it  means  that  the 
questions  of  faith  ought  to  be  r;idcd  by  this  judg- 
ment of  the  Pontiff.  Dcfinirc  is  fincm  iniponcre,  or 
finalitcr  judicare.  It  is  therefore  equivalent  to  de- 
tcnninare]  ox  finalitcr  dctcrniinarc^  which  words  are 
those  of  St.  Thomas  when  speaking  of  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  It  is  in  this  sense 
that  the  Vatican  Council  uses  the  word  dcfinicnda. 
It  signifies  the  final  decision  by  which  any  matter 
of  faith  and  morals  is  put  into  a  doctrinal  form. 

Now  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  definition  docs 
not  speak  of  either  controversies,  or  questions  of 
faith  and  morals.  It  speaks  of  the  doctrinal  author- 
ity of  the  Pontiff  in  general ;  and  therefore  both  of 
what  may  be  called  pacific  definitions  like  that  of 
the  Immaculate  Conception,  and  of  controversial 
definitions  like  those  of  St.  Innocent  against  the  Pe- 
lagians, or  St.  Leo  against  the  Monophysites. 
Moreover,  under  the  term  definitions,  as  we  have 
seen,  are  included  all  dogmatic  judgments.  In  the 
Bull  And  or  cm  Fidci  these  terms  are  used  as  synon- 
ymous. The  tenth  proposition  of  the  Synod  of 
Pistoia  is  condemned  as  "  Detrahens  firmitati  defin- 
itionum,  judiciorumve  dogmaticorum  Ecclesice." 
In  the  Italian  version  made  by  order  of  tlie  Pope 
these  words  arc  translated,  "  detraente  alia  fermezza 
delle  definizioni  o  giudizj  donmiatici  dclla  Chicsa." 
Now,  dogmatic  judgments  included  all  judgments 
in  matters  of  dogma ;  as  for  instance,  the  insi)i ra- 
tion and  authenticity  of  sacred  books,  the  ortho- 


THE   TWO   CONSTITUTIONS. 


95 


m 


doxy  or  heterodoxy  of  human  and  uninspired  books. 
But  intimately  connected  with  dogma  in  these 
judgments,  as  we  have  already  seen,  is  the  gram- 
matical and  literal  sense  of  such  texts.  The  theo- 
logical sense  of  such  texts  cannot  be  judged  of 
without  a  discernment  of  their  grammatical  and  lit- 
eral sense ;  and  both  are  included  in  the  same  dog- 
matic judgment,  that  is,  both  the  dogmatic  truth 
and  the  dogmatic  fact; 

The  example  above  given,  in  which  the  Pontiffs 
approved  and  commended  to  the  Church,  as  a  rule 
of  faith  against  Pelagianism,  the  writings  of  St. 
Augustine,  was  a  true  definition  of  doctrine  in  faith 
and  morals.  The  condemnation  of  the  "  Augusti- 
nus"  of  Jansenius,  and  of  the  five  propositions  ex- 
tracted from  it,  was  also  a  doctrinal  definition,  or  a 
dogmatic  judgment. 

In  like  manner  all  censures,  whether  for  heresy 
or  with  a  note  less  than  heresy,  are  doctrinal  defi- 
nitions in  faith  and  morals,  and  are  included  in  the 
words  m  doctrijia  de  fide  vcl  moribus  dcfinienda. 

In  a  word,  the  whole  inagistcruim  or  doctrinal 
authority  of  the  Pontiff  as  the  supreme  Doctor  of 
all  Christians,  is  included  in  this  definition  of  his 
infallibility.  And  also  all  legislative  or  judicial  acts, 
so  far  as  they  are  inseparably  connected  with  his 
doctrinal  authority  ;  as,  for  instance,  all  judgments, 
sentences,  and  decisions,  which  contain  the  motives 
of  such  acts  as  derived  from  faith  and  morals.  Un- 
der this  will  come  laws  of  discipline,  canonization 
of  Saints,  approbation  of  religious  Orders,  of  devo- 
tions, and  the  like ;  all  of  which  intrinsically  con- 
tain the  truths  and  principles  of  faith,  morals,  and 
piety. 


96 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


^1  IS 


The  Definition,  then,  limits  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pontiff  to  his  supreme  acts  ex  cathedra  in  faith  and 
morals,  but  extends  his  infallibility  to  all  acts  in  the 
fullest  exercise  of  his  supreme  magisteriuvi  or  doc- 
trinal authority. 

V.  Fifthly,  the  definition  declares  that  in  these 
acts  the  Pontiff  ^^ea  infallibilit  ate  poller  c,  qua  Divinus 
Redemptor  Ecclesiam  suam  in  definienda  doctrina 
de  fide  et  moribus  -nstructam  esse  voluit;"  that  is, 
that  he  is  possessed  of  the  infallibility  with  which 
our  Divine  Saviour  willed  that  His  Church  should 
be  endowed. 

It  is  to  be  carefully  noted  that  this  definition  de- 
clares that  the  Roman  Pontiff  possesses  by  himself 
the  infallibility  with  which  the  Church  in  unison 
with  him  is  endowed. 

Tne  definition  does  not  decide  the  question 
whether  the  infaUibility  of  the  Church  is  derived 
from  him  or  through  him.  But  it  does  decide  that 
his  infallibihty  is  not  derived  from  the  Church,  nor 
through  the  Church.  The  former  question  is  left 
untouched.  Two  truths  are  affirmed;  the  one, 
that  the  supreme  and  infallible  doctrinal  authority 
was  given  to  Peter,  the  other,  that  the  promise  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  was  afterwards  extended  to  the 
Apostles.  The  promises  "  Ego  rogavi  pro  te,"  and 
"  Non  praevalebunt,"  were  spoken  to  Peter  alone. 
The  promises  "  He  shall  lead  you  into  all  truth," 
and  *'  Behold,  I  am  with  you  all  days,"  were  spoken 
to  Peter  with  all  the  Apostles.  The  infallibility  of 
Peter  was,  therefore,  not  dependent  on  his  union 
with  them  in  exercising  it;  but,  their  infallibility 
was  evidently  dependent  o?i  their  union  with  him. 
In  like  manner,  the  whole  Episcopate  gathered  in 


i  ^ 


THE  TWO  CONSTITUTIONS. 


97 


Council  is  not  infallible  without  its  head.  But  the 
head  is  always  infallible  by  himself.  Thus  far  the 
definition  is  express,  and  the  infallibility  of  the 
Vicar  of  Christ  is  declared  to  be  the  privilegium 
Petri,  a  charisma  attached  to  the  primacy,  a  Divine 
assistance  given  as  a  prerogative  of  the  Head. 
There  is,  therefore,  a  special  fitness  in  the  word 
pollere  in  respect  to  the  Head  of  the  Church.  This 
Divine  assistance  is  his  special  prerogative  depend- 
ing on  God  alone ;  independent  of  the  Church, 
which  in  dependence  on  him  is  endowed  with  the 
same  infallibility.  If  the  definition  does  not  decide 
that  the  Church  derives  its  infallibility  from  the 
Head,  it  does  decide  that  the  Head  does  not  derive 
his  infallibility  from  the  Church ;  for  it  affirms  this 
Divine  assistance  to  be  derived  from  the  promise 
to  Peter  and  in  Peter  to  his  successors. 

VI.  Lastly,  the  definition  fixes  the  dogmatic 
value  of  these  Pontifical  acts  ex  cathedra,  by  declar- 
ing that  they  are  "  ex  sese,  non  autem  ex  consensu  Ec- 
clesicB  irrefonnabilia,"  that  is,  irreformable  in  and 
of  themselves,  and  not  because  the  Church  or  any 
part  or  any  members  of  the  Church  should  assent 
to  them.  These  words,  with  extreme  precision,  do 
two  things.  First,  they  ascribe  to  the  Pontifical 
acts  ex  cathedra,  in  faith  or  morals  an  intrinsic  in- 
fallibility ;  and  secondly,  they  exclude  from  them 
all  influx  of  any  other  cause  of  such  intrinsic  infal- 
libility. It  is  ascribed  alone  to  the  Divine  assist- 
ance given  to  the  Head  of  the  Church  for  that  end 
and  effect. 

I  need  not  add,  that  by  these  words  many  forms 
of  error  arc  excluded  :  as,  first,  the  theory  that  the 
joint  action  of  the  Episcopate  congregated  in 
5 


98 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Council  is  necessary  to  the  infallibility  of  the  Pon- 
tiff; secondly,  that  the  consent  of  the  Episcopate 
dispersed  is  required ;  thirdly,  that  if  not  the  ex- 
press at  least  the  tacit  assent  of  the  Episcopate  is 
needed.  All  these  alike  deny  the  infallibility  of 
the  Pontiff  till  his  acts  are  confirmed  by  the  Epis- 
copate. I  know,  indeed,  it  has  been  said  by  some, 
that  in  so  speaking  they  do  not  deny  the  infallibil- 
ity of  the  Pontiff,  but  affirm  him  to  be  infallible 
when  he  is  united  with  the  Episcopate,  from  which 
they  further  affirm  that  he  can  never  be  divided. 
But  this,  after  all,  resolves  the  efficient  cause  of  his 
infallibility  into  union  with  the  Episcopate,  and 
makes  its  exercise  dependent  upon  that  union ; 
which  is  to  deny  his  infallibility  as  a  privilege  of 
the  primacy,  independent  of  the  Church  which  he 
is  to  teach  and  to  confirm.  The  words  "  Ex  sese, 
non  aittem  ex  consensu  Ecclesice^'  preclude  all  ambig- 
uity by  which  for  two  hundred  years  the  promise 
of  our  Lord  to  Peter  and  his  successors  has  in  some 
minds  been  obscured. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  TERMINOLOGY   OF  THE   DOCTRINE   OF 
INFALLIBILITY. 


CO 

00 

crJ 

li.' 

™ 
r.: 
o 


'50 


I  WILL  now  add  a  few  words  respecting  the  terms 
which  have  been  used,  not  only  in  the  course  of 
the  last  months,  but  in  the  traditional  theology  of 
the  Schools,  on  the  doctrine  of  Infallibility. 

Certain  well-known  writers  have  rendered  mem- 
orable the  formula  of  "  personal,  separate,  indepen- 
dent and  absolute  infallibility."  It  has  not  only 
been  used  in  pastoral  letters,  and  pamphlets,  but 
introduced  into  high  diplomatic  correspondence. 

The  frequency  and  confidence  with  which  this 
formula  was  repeated,  as  if  taken  from  the  writings 
of  the  promoters  of  the  Definition,  made  it  not  un- 
natural to  examine  into  the  origin,  history,  and 
meaning  of  the  formula  itself.  I  therefore  set  my- 
self to  search  it  out ;  and  I  employed  others  to  do 
the  same.  As  it  had  been  ascribed  to  myself,  our 
first  examination  was  turned  to  anything  I  might 
have  written.  After  repeated  search,  not  only  was 
the  formula  as  a  whole  nowhere  to  be  discovered, 
but  the  words  of  which  it  is  composed  were,  with 
the  exception  of  the  word  "  independent,"  equally 
nowhere  to  be  found.  I  mention  this,  that  I  may 
clear  away  the  supposition  that  in  what  I  add  I 

(99) 


ICX) 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


;i! 


have  any  motive  of  defending  myself  or  anything  I 
may  have  written.  I  speak  of  it  now  simply  for  the 
truth's  sake,  and  for  charity,  which  is  always  pro- 
moted by  a  clear  statement  of  truth,  and  never  by 
the  confused  noise  of  controversy  ;  and  also  to  jus- 
tify some  of  the  most  eminent  defenders  of  Catho- 
lic doctrine,  by  showing  that  this  terminology  is  to 
be  found  in  the  writings  of  many  of  our  greatest 
theologians. 

I  may  remind  you,  in  passing,  that  in  the  Defini- 
tion not  a  trace  of  this  formula  nor  of  its  compo- 
nent words  is  to  be  found. 

First,  as  to  the  word  personal.  Cardinal  Toletus, 
speaking  of  the  doctrine  of  infallibility,  says,  "  The 
first  opinion  is,  that  the  privilege  of  the  Pope,  that 
of  not  erring  in  faith,  is  personal ;  and  cannot  be 
communicated  to  another."  After  quoting  our 
Lord's  words,  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee,"  etc.,  he 
adds,  "  I  concede  that  this  privilege  is  personal."* 

Ballerini  says,  that  the  jurisdiction  of  St.  Peter, 
by  reason  of  the  primacy,  was  "  singular  and  per- 
sonal" to  himself.  The  same  right  he  affirms  to 
belong  also  to  the  Roman  Pontiffs,  St.  Peter's  suc- 
cessors." f 

This  doctrine  he  explains  diffusely. 


*  "  Prima  est  quod  privilcgium  Papoe  ut  in  fide  errare  non  possit 
est  personale,  nee  ipse  potest  alteri  communicare,  Luc.  xxii.  :  '  Ego 
rogavi  pro  te,  Petrc,  et  tu  aliquando  conversus  confirma  fratres 
tuos.'  Ad  primum  concedo  esse  illud  privilegium  personale  :  ob  id 
communicari  non  potest." — Toletus.  In  Smnm.  Enarr,  torn.  ii.  pp. 
63,  64.    Rome,  18G9. 

f  "  Jurisdictio  et  prserogativas  qute  eidem  scdi  ab  antiquis  asse- 
runtur  ratione  primatus  ejusdem  Petri  ac  successorum  singularcs 
ot  personales  judicandae  sunt." — Ballerini,  de  Vi  et  Ratione  Prima- 
tm,  cap.  iii.  sect.  6,  p.  14.    Rome,  1849. 


DOCTRINE   OF   INFALLIBILITY. 


lOI 


"This  primacy  of  chief  jurisdiction,  not  ot  mere 
order,  in  St.  Peter  and  the  Roman  Pontiffs  his  suc- 
cessors, is  personal,  that  is,  attached  to  their  per- 
son ;  and  therefore  a  supreme  personal  right,  which 
is  communicated  to  no  other,  is  contained  in  the 
primacy. 

"  Hence,  when  there  is  question  of  the  rights  and 
the  jurisdiction  proper  to  the  primacy,  and  when 
these  are  ascribed  to  the  Roman  See,  or  Cathedra, 
or  Church  of  St.  Peter ;  by  the  name  of  the  Roman 
See,  or  Cathedra,  or  Church,  to  which  this  primacy 
of  jurisdiction  is  ascribed,  the  single  person  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is  to  be  understood,  to  whom  alone 
the  same  primacy  is  attached. 

"  Hence  again  it  follows,  that  whatsoever  belongs 
to  the  Roman  See  or  Cathedra  or  Church,  by  rea- 
son of  the  primacy,  is  so  to  be  ascribed  to  the  person 
of  the  Roman  Pontiffs  that  they  need  help  or  asso- 
ciation of  none  for  the  exercise  of  that  right."  * 

From  this  passage  three  conclusions  flow : 

I.  First,  that  the  Primacy  is  a  personal  privilege 
in  Peter  and  his  successors. 


*"Hic  praecipuae  jurisdictionis  et  non  men  ordinis  primatus 
S.  Petri  et  liomanorum  Pontificum  ejus  successorum  personalis  est, 
seu  ipsorum  personae  alligatus  ;  ac  proinde  jus  quoddam  preecipuuia 
ipsorum  personale,  id  est,  nulli  alii  commune,  in  eo  primatu  con- 
tineri  debet.  Hinc  cum  de  jure,  seu  j urisdictione  propria  primatus 
agitur,  liiEcque  Romanre  S.  Petri  sedi,  cathedrae,  vel  Ecclesiae  tribui- 
tur  ;  sedis  cathedrae  vel  Ecclesiae  Romanae  nomine,  cui  ea  jurisdictio 
primatus  propria  asseratur,  una  Roman!  Pontificis  persona  intel- 
ligenda  est,  cui  uni  idem  primatus  est  alligatus.  Hinc  quoque 
sequitur,  quidquid  juris  ratione  primatus  Romanae  sedi  cathedrte, 
vel  Ecclesiae  competit,  Romanorum  Pontificum  personae  ita  esse 
tribuendum  ut  nullius  adjutorio  vel  societate  ad  idem  jus  exercen- 
dum  indigeant." — Ballerini,  dc  Vi  et  Ratione  Primatus,  cap.  ill. 
propositio  3,  p.  10. 


102 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


iJ  'i 


2.  Secondly,  that  this  personal  privilege  attaches 
to  Peter  and  to  the  Roman  Pontiffs  alone. 

3.  Thirdly,  that  in  exercising  this  same  primacy 
the  Roman  Pontiff  needs  the  help  and  society  of  no 

other. 

Ballerini  then  adds : 

"  That  what  was  personal  in  Peter  by  reason  of 
the  primacy,  is  to  be  declared  personal  in  his  suc- 
cessors the  Roman  Pontiffs,  on  whom  the  same 
primacy  of  Peter  with  the  same  jurisdiction  has  de- 
volved, no  one  can  deny. 

"  Therefore  to  Peter  alone,  and  to  the  person 
alone  of  his  successors,  the  dignity  and  jurisdiction 
of  the  Primacy  is  so  attached,  that  it  can  be  ascrib- 
ed to  no  other  Bishop,  even  though  of  the  Chief 
Sees ;  and  much  less  can  it  be  ascribed  to  any  num- 
ber whatsoever  of  Bishops  congregated  together ; 
nor  in  that  essential  jurisdiction  of  the  primacy 
ought  the  Roman  Pontiff  to  depend  on  any  one 
whomsoever ;  nor  can  he ;  especially  as  the  jurisdic- 
tion received  from  Christ  was  instituted  by  Christ 
un-circumscribed  by  any  condition,  and  personal  in 
Peter  alone  and  his  successors :  like  as  He  instituted 
the  primacy  of  jurisdiction  to  be  personal,  which 
without  personal  jurisdiction  is  unintelligible."  '^ 


*  "  Quod  autem  personale  in  Petro  fuit  ratione  primatus,  idem  in 
successoribus  ejus  Romania  Pontificibus,  in  quos  idem  primatus 
Petri  cum  eadem  jurisdictione  transivit,  personale  esse  dicendum, 
inficiari  potest  nemo.  Soli  igitur  Petro  et  soli  successorum  ejus 
personse  ita  alligata  est  propria  primatus  dignitas  et  jurisdictio  ut 
nulli  alii  Episcopo  prsestantiorum  licet  sedium,  et  minus  multo 
pluribus  aliis  Episcopis  quantumvis  in  unum  collectis,  possit  ad- 
Bcribi:  neque  in  ea  jurisdictione  primatus  essentiali  Romanus  Pon- 
tifex  dependere  ab  alio  quopiam  debet  aut  potest,  cum  proesertim 
ipsam  a  Christo  acceptam  idem  Christus  nulla  conditioue  circum- 


DOCTRINE  OF  INFALLIBILITY. 


103 


ll 


From  these  statements  it  follows : 

1.  First,  that  what  depends  on  no  other  is  alto- 
gether independent. 

2.  Secondly,  that  what  is  circumscribed  by  no 
condition  is  absolute. 

3.  Thirdly,  that  what  is  by  God  committed  to 
one  alone,  depends  on  God  alone. 

But  perhaps  it  will  be  said  that  all  this  relates 
not  to  infallibility,  but  to  the  power  of  jurisdiction 
only. 

To  this  I  answer : 

1.  That  if  the  primacy  be  personal,  all  its  pre- 
rogatives are  personal. 

2.  That  the  doctrinal  authority  of  the  Pontiff  is  a 
part  of  his  jurisdiction,  and  is  therefore  personal. 

3.  That  infallibility  is,  as  the  Definition  expressly 
declares,  a  supernatural  grace,  or  charisma^  attach- 
ed to  the  primacy,  in  order  to  its  proper  exercise. 
Infallibility  is  a  quality  of  the  doctrinal  jurisdiction 
of  the  Pontiff  in  faith  and  morals. 

And  such  also  is  the  doctrine  of  Ballerini,  who 
lays  down  the  following  propositions :  vr 

"  Unity  with  the  Roman  faith  is  absolutely  neces- 
sary, and  therefore  the  prerogative  of  absolute  in- 
fallibility is  to  be  ascribed  to  it,  and  a  coercive 
power  to  constrain  to  unity  of  faith,  in  like  manner, 
absolute ;  as  also  the  infallibility  and  coercive  pow- 
er of  the  Catholic  Church  itself,  which  is  bound  to 
adhere  to  the  faith  of  Rome,  is  absolute."  ^ 


' 


scriptam,  personalem  solius  Petri  ac  successorum  esse  instituerit, 
uti  primatum  jurisdictionis  instituit  personalem,  qui  sine  personali 
j  urisdictione  intelligi  nequit." — Balleriui,  de  Vi  et  Ratione  Primatus, 
cap.  iii.  sect.  4,  p.  13.  •  ' 

*  Ballerini  de  Vi  et  HcU.  Primatus:  Unitae  cum  Romana  fide 


104 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


But  Ballerini  has  declared  that  whatsoever  is  as- 
cribed to  the  Roman  See,  Cathedra,  or  Church  is 
to  be  ascribed  to  the  Person  of  the  Roman  Pontiff 
only.  Therefore  this  infallibility  and  coercive 
power  are  to  be  ascribed  to  him,  and  arc  per- 
sonal. 

Here  we  have  the  infallibility  personal,  indepen- 
dent, and  absolute,  fully  and  explicitly  taught  by 
two  chief  theologians  of  great  repute. 

But  hitherto  we  have  not  met  the  word  separate, 
though  in  truth  the  word  sole,  or  alone,  is  equiva- 
lent. 

I  will  therefore  add  certain  quotations  from  the 
great  Dominican  School. 

Bzovius,  the  continuator  of  the  Annals  of  Bar- 
onius,  says,  "  To  Peter  alone,  and  after  him  to  all  the 
Roman  Pontiffs  legitimately  succeeding,  the  priv- 
ilege of  infallibility,  as  it  is  called,  was  conceded 
by  the  Prince  of  Pastors,  Christ,  who  is  God."  * 

Dominicus  Marchese  writes :  "  This  privilege 
was  conceded  to  the  successors  of  Peter  alone 
without  the  assistance  of  the  College  of  Cardi- 
nals ; "  and  again,  "  To  the  Roman  Pontiff  alone, 


absolute  nece8sar?a  est,  ac  proinde  infallibilatis  praerogativa  absoluta 
illi  est  tribuenda,  et  vis  coactiva  ad  fidei  unitatem  iiariter  absoluta : 
sicuti  absoluta  est  item  infallibilitas  et  vis  coactiva  ipsius  Ecclesiae 
CatholicoB,  quae  Romanos  fidei  adlia;rero  oportet.  Appendix  De  ia- 
fall.  Pont,.  Prop.  vii. 

*  "  Soli  Petro  et  post  cum  omnibus  Romanis  Pontificibus  legitime 
fledentibus,  infallibilitatis  quod  vocant  privilegium,  a  Principe  pas- 
torum  Christo  Deo  concessum,  ut  in  rebus  fidei,  morum  doctrina,  et 
universalis  Ecclesise  administrationo  certissima  nullaquo  fallacioa 
nota  inumbrata  decreta  veritatis  ipsius  radio  scribant  edicaut  et 
sanciant." — Rzovius,  de  Pontifice  Romano,  cap.  xiv.  p.  106;  apud 
Rocaberti,  Bibliotb.  Pontif.  torn.  i.  Rome,  1098. 


DOCTRINE   OF   INFALLIBILITY. 


105 


in  the  person  of  Peter,  was  committed  the  care  of 
the  Universal  Church,  and  firmness,  and  certainty 
in  defining  matters  of  faith."* 

Gravina  teaches  as  follows :  "  To  the  Pontiff,  as 
one  (person)  and  alone,  u.  was  given  to  be  the 
head ; "  and  again,  *•  The  Roman  Pontiff  for  the 
time  being  is  one,  therefore  he  alone  has  infallibil- 

ity."t 

Vincentius  Ferrd  says,  "  The  exposition  of  cer- 
tain Paris  (doctors)  is  of  no  avail,  who  affirm  that 
Christ  only  promised  that  the  faith  should  not  fail 
of  the  Church  founded  upon  Peter ;  and  not  that  it 
should  not  fail  in  the  successors  of  Peter  taken  apart 
from  (seorsumj  the  Church."  He  adds  that  our 
Lord  said,  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  Peter ;  suffi- 
ciently showing  that  the  infallibility  was  not 
promised  to  the  Church  as  apart  from  (seorsum) 
the  head,  but  promised  to  the  head,  that  from 
him  it  should  be  derived  to  the  Church."  :|: 


*  "  Soli  Petro  secluso  ab  Apojtolis  nc  proinde  soli  ejus  successori 
Summo  Pontifici  secluso  Cnrdinalium  Collegio  hoc  privilegium  con- 
cessit."— Marchese,  de  Capite  visibili  Ecclesia,  disput.  iil.  dub.  3,  p. 
719  ;  apud  Rocaberti,  torn.  ix. 

"  Soli  Romano  Pontifici  in  persona  Petri  commissa  est  cura  totius 
Ecclesia)  et  firmitas  et  certitudo  in  dcfiniendo  res  fidei," — Marchese, 
disput.  V.  dub.  1,  sect.  3,  {).  785  ;  apud  Rocaberti,  torn.  ix. 

f  "  Uni  ct  soli  Pontifici  datum  est  esse  caput." — Gravina,  de  8U' 
premo  Judice  controv.  Fidei,  qua;st.  i.  apud  Rocaberti,  tom.  viii.  p. 
893. 

"  Null  us  in  terra  rcperitur  alter,  qui  cteteris  sit  in  fide  firmior  et 
constantior  sciatur  esse  quam  unus  Pontifex  Romanus  pro  tempore  ; 
ergo  et  ipse  solus  habet  infallibilitatem." — Graviua,  quoest.  ii.  apud 
Rocaberti,  tom.  viii.  p.  433. 

X  "  Nee  valet  expositio  aliquorum  Parisionsium  afBrmantium  hio 
Christum  tantum  promisisso  fidem  non  defecturam  Ecclesioj  fundatra 
Buper  Petrum,  non  vero  promisisso  non  defecturam  in  successoribua 

5* 


io6 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


11 


Marchese,  before  quoted,  repeats  the  same  words, 
"  The  infallibility  in  faith  which  (our  Lord)  prom- 
ised, not  to  the  Church  apart  from  (seorsum)  the 
head,  but  to  the  head,  that  from  him  it  should  be 
derived  to  the  Church."*  Billuart  also  says, 
"(ChrisL)  makes  a  clear  distinction  of  Peter  from 
the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  and  from  the  whole 
Church,  when  He  says.  And  thou,  &c."  f 

Peter  Soto  writes :  "  When  this  (Pasce  oves  meas, 
&c.)  was  said  to  Peter  in  the  presence  of  the  rest 
of  the  Apostles,  it  was  said  to  Peter  as  one,  and  as 
apart  from  (seorsum)  the  rest."  J 

And  Marchese  again,  "  Therefore  to  Peter  alone 
set  apart  from  the  Apostles  (secluso  ab  Apostolis), 
and  therefore  to  his  successor  alone,  the  Supreme 
Pontiff,  set  apart  from  the  College  of  Cardinals,  He 
(our  Lord)  conceded  this  privilege."  § 


': 


li: 


Petri  seorsum  ab  Ecclesia  sumptis.  Christus  dicens,  ego  autem 
rogavi  pro  te  Petre,  satis  designat  lianc  infallibilitatem  non  promis- 
Bam  EcclesisB  ut  seorsum  a  capite,  sed  promissam  capiti,  ut  ex  illo 
derivetur  ad  Ecclesiam." — Ferre,  Be  Fide,  qusest.  xii.  apud  Roca- 
berti,  torn.  xx.  p.  388. 

*  "  Satis  designat  i.ifallibflitatem  in  fido  quam  promisit,  non  Ec- 
clesiflB  seorsum  a  Capite  sed  Capiti  ut  ex  illo  derivetur  ad  Ecclesiam." 
- — Marchese,  do  capite  Visiib.  Eccles.  disput.  iii.  dub.  2  ;  apud  Rooa- 
berti,  torn.  ix.  p.  719. 

f  "  Facit  enim  apertam  distinctionem  Petri  ab  aliis  apostolis  et  a 
iota  Ecclesia  cum  dicit,  et  tu  aliquando  conversus  confirma  fratres 
tuos."— Billuart,  de  Eegulis  Fidei,  disftcrt.  iv.  art.  5,  sect.  3,  tom.  iv 
p.  78.    Venice,  1787. 

X  "  Dum  vero  hoc  Petro  coram  coeteris  apostolis  dicitur,  uni  in- 
quam,  Petro  et  a  cseteris  seorsum." — Petrus  Soto,  JDefensio  Catholicat 
Confesmnis,  cap.  83,  apud  Rocabert'  tom.  xviii.  p.  73. 

§  "  Ergo  soli  Petro  secluso  ab  Apostolis  ac  proindo  soli  ejus  suc- 
cssori  summo  Pontifici,  secluso  Cardinalium  collegio,  hoc  privi- 
lege um  concessit."— Marchese,  de  Capite  viaib.  Ecclea,  disp.  iii.  dub. 
8 ;  apud  Rocabert!,  tom.  ix.  p.  715. 


DOCTRINE  OF   INFALLIBILITY. 


107 


Lastly,  F.  Gatti,  the  learned  professor  of  theology 
of  the  Dominican  Order  at  this  day,  writing  of  the 
words,  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee,"  &c.,  says,  "  inde- 
fectibility  is  promised  to  Peter  apart  from  (seorsum) 
the  Church,  or  from  the  Apostles ;  but  it  is  not 
promised  to  the  Apostles,  or  to  the  Church,  apart 
from  (seorsum)  the  head,  or  with  the  head,"  and 
afterwards  he  adds,  "  Therefore  Peter,  even  apart 
from  (seorsum)  the  Church,  is  infallible."  * 

Muzzarelli,  in  his  treatise  on  the  primacy  and  in- 
fallibility of  the  Pontiff,  uses  the  same  terms  again 
and  again  ;  of  which  the  following  is  an  example  : 
Speaking  as  in  the  person  of  the  Pontiff,  he  says, 
"  If  I  separately  from  a  Council  propose  any  truth 
to  be  believed  by  the  Universal  Church,  it  is  most 
certain  that  I  cannot  err."  f 

In  like  manner  Mauro  Cappellari,  afterwards 
Gregory  XVI.,  affirms  that  the  supreme  judge  of 
controversies  is  the  Pontiff,  "  distinct  and  separate 
from  all  other  Bishops ;  and  that  his  decree  in 
things  of  faith  ought  by  them  to  be  held  without 
doubt."  :|:  :,, 


*  "  Indefectibilitas  promittitur  Petro  seorsum  ab  Ecclesia  seu  ab 
Apostolis ;  non  vero  promittitur  A-postolis  seu  EccleeioB  sive  seorsum 
a  capite,  sive  una  cum  capite. — Ergo  Petrus  etiam  seorsum  ab  Ec- 
clesia spectatuB  est  infallibilis." — Gatti,  Institutiones  Apologetico- 
Polemical,  apud  Biaaclii  de  ConstUutione  Monarchica  Ecclesiix,  p.  124. 
Rome,  1870. 

f  "  Ne  viene  die  so  ancli'  io  separatamente  dal  concilio  vorro  pro- 
porre  alia  cliiosa  universale  la  veritA  da  credersi  su  questo  articolo, 
non  potro  cortamento  erraro." — Muzzarelli,  Primato  ed  InfallibiUtd 
del  Papa,  in  11  Biion  Uso  della  Logica,  torn.  i.  p.  183.  Florence, 
1821. 

:|:  n  Trionfo  della  Santa  Sede,  Cap.  v.  Sect.  10,  p.  124.  Venezia, 
1882. 


^ 


il 


i 


VWi 


I :]; 


I 


io8 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


Lastly,  Clement  VI.,  in  the  fourteenth  centjry, 
proposed  to  the  Armenians  certain  interrogations, 
of  which  the  fourth  is  as  follows  : 

"  Hast  thou  believed,  and  dost  thou  still  believe, 
that  the  Roman  Pontiff  a/one  can,  by  an  authentic 
determination  to  which  we  must  inviolably  adhere, 
put  an  end  to  doubts  which  arise  concerning  the 
Catholic  faith  ;  and  that  whatsoever  he,  by  the  au- 
thority of  the  keys  delivered  to  him  by  Christ, 
determines  to  be  true,  is  true  and  Catholic  ;  and 
what  he  determines  to  be  false  and  heretical  is  to 
be  so  esteemed  ? "  * 

In  the  above  passages  we  have  infallibility  per- 
sonal, absolute,  independent,  without  the  Apostles, 
without  the  college  of  Cardinals,  alone,  apart  from 
the  Church,  separate  from  Councils  and  from 
Bishops. 

I  am  not  aware  of  any  modern  writer  who  has 
used  language  so  explicit  and  fearless. 

We  will  now  ascertain  the  scholastic  meaning  of 
these  terms  ;  and  we  shall  see  that  they  are  in  pre- 
cise accordance  with  the  definition  of  the  Council. 

You  need  not  be  reminded.  Reverend  and  dear 
Brethren,  of  the  terminology  of  Canonists  in  treat- 
ing the  subject  of  privileges. 

A  privilege  is  a  right,  or  faculty,  bestowed  upon 
persons,  places,  or  things. 

*  "  Si  credidisti  et  adhuc  credis  solum  Romnnum  Pontificera, 
dubiis  emergentibus  circa  fidem  catholicam  posse  per  determina- 
tionem  authenticam  cui  sit  inviolabiliter  adhoerendum,  finem  im- 
ponere  et  esse  verura  ot  Catholicum  quidquid  ipse  auctori tale  cla- 
vium  sibl  traditarum  a  Chrlsto  detenninat  esse  veruin  ;  et  quod 
determinat  esse  falsum  et  heeroticmu  sit  censendum." — Baronius, 
torn.  XXV.  ad  ann.  1351,  p.  529.    Lucca,  1750. 


DOCTRINE  OF  INFALLIBILITY. 


109 


Privileges,  therefore,  are  of  three  kinds,  personal, 
real,  and  mixed.* 

A  personal  privilege  is  that  which  attaches  to 
the  person  as  such. 

A  real  privilege  attaches  either  to  a  place,  or  to 
a  thing,  or  to  an  office. 

A  mixed  privilege  may  be  both  personal  and 
real ;  it  may  also  attach  to  a  community  or  body 
of  persons,  as  to  an  University,  or  a  College,  or  a 
Chapter. 

The  primacy,  including  jurisdiction  and  infalli- 
bility, is  a  privilege  attaching  to  the  person  of 
Peter  and  of  his  successors.  It  is  therefore  a  per- 
sonal privilege  in  the  Pontiffs. 

It  is  personal,  as  Toletus  says,  because  it  cannot 
be  communicated  to  others.  It  is  not  a  real  privi- 
lege attached  to  the  See,  or  Cathedra,  or  Church 
of  Rome,  and  therefore  to  the  person  ;  but  to  the 
person  of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  and,  therefore,  to  the 
See. 

It  is  not  a  mixed  privilege,  attaching  to  the  Pon- 
tiff, only  in  union  with  a  community  or  body,  such 
as  the  Episcopate,  congregated  or  dispersed  ;  but 
attaching  to  his  person,  because  inherent  in  the 
primacy,  which  he  alone  personally  bears. 

The  use  of  the  word  personal  is  therefore  precise 
and  correct,  according  to  the  scholastic  termin- 
ology ;  not,  indeed,  according  to  the  sense  of  news- 
paper theologians.  Theology,  like  chancery  law, 
has  its  technical  language  ;  and  the  common  sense 
of  Englishmen  would  keep  them  from  using  it  in 
any  other  meaning. 


*  Roiffenstuel.  Tit.  de  Piivileff.  lib.  v.  84, 13. 


no 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


ill 


I'  III  I 


i 

I 

i 

i 

I' 

t   ■ 


In  this  sense  it  is  that  the  Dominican  theologian 
De  Fiume  says,  "  There  are  two  things  ...  in 
Peter :  one  personal,  and  another  public ;  as  Pastor 
and  Head  of  the  Church.  Some  things,  therefore, 
belong  to  the  person  of  Peter  alone,  and  do  not 
pass  to  his  successors ;  as  the  saying,  Get  thee  be- 
hind me,  Satan  .  .  .  and  the  like.  Some,  again, 
are  spoken  of  him  as  a  public  person^  and  by  reason 
of  his  office  as  supreme  Head  and  Pastor  of  the 
Universal  Church,  as,  Feed  My  Sheep,  &c."  * 

Therefore,  infallibility  is  the  privilege  of  Peter, 
not  as  a  private  person,  but  as  a  public  person, 
holding  the  primacy  over  the  Universal  Church. 

In  the  Pastoral  addressed  to  you  so  long  ago  as 
the  year  1867,  this  was  pointed  oui  in  the  unmis- 
takable words  of  Cardinal  Sfondratus.  "  The  Pon- 
tiff," he  says,  "  does  some  things  as  a  man,  some 
things  as  a  prince,  some  as  doctor,  some  as  Pope, 
that  is,  as  head  and  foundation  of  the  Church  j.  and 
it  is  only  to  these  (last-named)  actions  that  we  at- 
tribute the  gift  of  infallibility.  The  others  we 
leave  to  his  human  condition.  As  then  not  every 
action  of  the  pope  is  papal,  so  not  every  action  of 
the  Pope  enjoys  the  papal  privilege."  f 

*  "  Duo  namque  sunt  in  Petro.  Unum  personale  et  aliud  pub- 
licum, ut  Pastor  et  caput  Ecclesia).  Quajdam  ergo  tautumniodo 
personse  Petri  conveniunt,  ad  successores  non  transcunt ;  ut  quod 
dicatur  :  Vade  post  me,  h'atana,  et  similia.  Qujedam  vcro  dicuntur 
de  60  juatenus  est  persona  publica,  ct  rationo  officii  Supremi 
Capitis  et  Pastoris  Ecclesioe  univcrsalia  ;  ut  Pasco  ovcs  lupas,  &c." — 
Ignatius  de  Fiumo,  Schola  vcntatis  orthodoxm,  apud  Bianchi,  de 
Constiiutione  Monarchica  Ecclesia,  p.  88.    Rouio,  1870. 

f  "  Pontifex  allqua  facit  ut  homo,  aliqua  ut  Princeps,  aliqua  ut 
Doctor,  aliqua  ut  Papa,  hoc  c«t  ut  caput  et  fundamentum  Ecclesioe ; 
et  his  solis  actionibus  privilegium  infallibilitatis  adscribimus :  alias 


DOCTRINE   OF   INFALLIBILITY. 


Ill 


The  value,  therefore,  of  this  traditional  language 
of  the  schools  is  evident. 

When  the  infallibility  of  the  Pontiff  is  said  to  be 
personal,  it  is  to  exclude  all  doubt  as  to  the  source 
from  which  infallibility  is  derived ;  and  to  declare 
that  it  is  not  a  privilegiuin  mixtiim  inherent  in  the 
Episcopate,  or  comrp^nicated  by  it  to  the  head  of 
the  Church ;  but  a  special  assistance  of  the  Spirit 
of  Truth  attaching  to  the  primacy,  and  therefore 
to  the  person  who  bears  the  primacy,  Peter  and  his 
successors ;  conferred  on  them  by  Christ  Himself 
for  the  confirmation  of  the  Church  in  faith. 

2.  Next,  as  to  the  term  separate.  The  sense  in 
which  theologians  have  used  this  term  is  obvious. 
They  universally  and  precisely  apply  it  to  express 
the  same  idea  as  the  word  personal  \  namely,  that 
in  the  possession  and  exercise  of  this  privilege  of 
infallibility  the  successor  of  Peter  depends  on  no 
one  but  God.  The  meaning  of  decapitation,  de- 
collation, and  cutting  off,  of  a  headless  body,  and  a 
bodiless  head,  I  have  hardly  been  able  to  persuade 
myself,  has  ever,  by  serious  men,  at  least  in  serious 
moods,  been  imputed  to  such  words  as  separatim, 
seorsiun^  or  seclusis  Episcopis, 

My  reason  for  this  doubt  is,  that  such  a  mon- 
strous sense  includes  at  least  six  heresies  ;  and  I 
could  hardly  think  that  any  Catholic  would  fail  to 
know  this,  or,  knowing  it,  would  impute  it  to 
Catholics,  still  less  to  Bishops  of  the  Church. 

The  words  seorsum,  &c.,  may  have  two  meanings, 
one  obviously  false,  the  other  as  obviously  true, 

humantE  conditioni  relinquimus  :  sicut  ergo  non  omnia  actio  Papro 
est  papalis,  ita  non  omnia  actio  Papce  papali  privllegio  gaudet." — ■ 
SiondreLti,  Megaie  Saccrdotium,  lib.  iil  BQC.l. 


112 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


'  ?ii 


The  former  sense  would  be  disunion  of  the  head 
from  the  body  of  the  episcopate  and  the  faithful, 
or  separation  from  Catholic  communion ;  the  lat- 
ter, an  independent  action  in  the  exercise  of  his 
supreme  office. 

And  first  of  the  former  : 

1.  It  is  de  fide,  or  matter  #f  faith,  that  the  head 
of  the  Church,  as  such,  can  never  be  separated, 
either  fjrom  the  Ecclesia  doccns,  or  the  Ecclesia  dis- 
ce?is ;  that  is,  either  from  the  Episcopate  or  from 
the  faithful. 

To  suppose  this,  would  be  to  deny  the  perpetual 
indwelling  office  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  Church, 
by  which  the  mystical  body  is  knit  together ;  the 
head  to  the  Body,  the  Body  to  the  head,  the  mem- 
bers to  each  other  ;  and  to  "  dissolve  Jesus,"  *  that 
is,  to  destroy  the  perfect  symmetry  and  organiza- 
tion which  the  Apostle  describes  as  the  body  of 
Christ ;  and  St.  Augustine  speaks  of  as  "  one  man, 
head  and  body,  Christ  and  the  Church  a  perfect 
man."  f  On  this  unity  all  the  properties  and  en- 
dowments of  the  Church  depend  ;  indefectibility, 
urvity,  infallibility.  As  the  Church  can  never  be 
separated  from  its  invisible  Head,  so  never  from 
its  visible  head.  •        - 

2.  Secondly,  it  is  matter  of  faith  that  the  Ecclesia 
docejts  or  the  Episcopate,  to  which,  together  with 
Peter,  and  as  it  were,  in  one  person  with  him,  the 
assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  promised,  can 
never  be  dissolved  ;  but  it  would  be  dissolved  if  it 


*  St.  John  iv.  3,  "  Oriinis  spiritus  qui  solvit  Jesum,"  &c. 

f  "  Unus  homo  caput  et  corpus,  unus  homo  Cliristus  et  Ecclesia 
vir  perfectua."— S.  Augustin.  In  Paalm  xviii.  torn.  iv.  p.  85,  86,  ed. 
Ben.    Paris,  1681. 


'J"- 


DOCTRINE  OF  INFALLIBILITY. 


113 


were  separated  from  its  head.  Such  separation 
would  destroy  the  infallibihty  of  the  Church  itself. 
The  Ecclesia  docens  would  cease  to  exist ;  but  this 
is  impossible,  and  without  heresy  cannot  be  sup- 
posed. 

3.  Thirdly,  it  is  also  matter  of  faith  that  not  only 
no  separation  of  communion,  but  even  no  disunion 
of  doctrine  and  faith  between  the  Head  and  the 
Body,  that  is,  between  the  Ecclesia  docens  and  dis- 
cejis,  can  ever  exist.  Both  are  infallible  ;  the  one 
actively,  in  teaching,  the  other  passively,  in  believ- 
ing ;  and  both  are  therefore  inseparably,  because 
necessarily,  united  in  one  faith.  Even  though  a 
number  of  bishops  should  fall  away,  as  in  the  Arian 
and  Nestorian  heresies,  yet  the  Episcopate  could 
never  fall  away.  It  would  always  remain  united, 
by  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  its  head  ; 
and  the  reason  of  this  inseparable  union  is  pre- 
cisely the  infallibility  of  its  head.  Because  its  head 
can  never  err,  it,  as  a  body,  can  never  err.  How 
many  soever,  as  individuals,  should  err  and  fall 
away  from  the  truth,  the  Episcopate  would  remain, 
and  therefore  never  be  disunited  from  its  head  in 
teaching  or  believing.  Even  a  minority  of  the 
Bishops  united  to  the  head,  would  be  the  Episco- 
pate of  the  Universal  Church.  They,  therefore, 
and  they  only,  teach  the  possibility  of  such  a  sepa- 
ration, who  assert  that  the  Pontiff  may  fall  into 
error.  But  they  who  deny  his  infallibility  do  ex- 
pressly assert  the  possibility  of  such  a  separation. 
And  yet,  it  is  they  who  have  imputed  to  the  de- 
fenders of  the  Pontifical  infallibility,  that  separation 
which  on  "  Ultramontane  "  principles  is  impossible ; 
but,  on  the  principles  of  those  who  lay  the  charge, 


^11 


114 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


i'  M 


such  a  separation  is  not  only  possible,  but  even  of 
probable  occurrence. 

So  far,  we  have  spoken  of  the  idea  of  separation 
from  communion,  or  disunion  in  faith  and  doctrine. 
But  further,  the  separate  or  independent  exercise 
of  the  supreme  Pontifical  authority  in  no  way  im- 
ports separation  or  disunion  of  any  kind. 

1.  It  is  de  fide  that  the  plenitude  of  jurisdiction 
was  given  to  Peter  and  his  successors ;  and  that 
its  exercise  over  the  whole  body,  pastors  and  peo- 
ple, imports  no  separation  or  disunion  from  the 
Body.  How  then  should  the  exercise  of  infallibility, 
which  is  attached  to  that  jurisdiction,  import  sep- 
aration ? 

2.  Again,  it  is  de  fide  that  this  supreme  jurisdiction 
and  infallibility  was  given  to  maintain  and  perpet- 
uate the  unity  of  the  Church.  How  then  can  its 
exercise  produce  separation,  which  it  is  divinely 
ordained  to  prevent  ? 

It  is  therefore  dc  fide  that  its  exercise  excludes 
separation,  and  binds  the  whole  Church,  both  Body 
and  Head,  in  closer  bonds  of  communion,  doctrine 
and  faith. 

3.  Lastly,  it  is  de  fide  that  in  the  assistance  pro- 
mised to  Peter  and  his  successors,  all  the  means 
necessary  for  its  due  exercise  are  contained.  An 
infallible  office  fallibly  exercised  is  a  contradiction 
in  terms.  The  infallibility  of  the  head  consists  in 
this,  that  he  is  guided  both  as  to  the  means  and  as 
to  the  end.  It  is  therefore  contrary  to  faith  to 
say,  that  the  independent  exercise  of  this  office, 
divinely  assisted,  can  import  separation  or  disunion 
of  any  kind.  It  is  a  part  of  the  promise,  that  in  the 
selection  of  the  means  of  its  exercise,  the  successor 


DOCTRINE   OF  INFALLIBILITY. 


115 


of  Peter  will  not  err.  If  he  erred  as  to  the  means, 
either  he  would  err  as  to  the  end,  or  he  would  be 
preserved  only  by  a  series  of  miracles.  In  escap- 
ing from  the  supernatural,  the  objectors  fall  into 
the  miraculous.  The  Catholic  doctrine  of  i:  falli- 
bility invokes  no  such  interventions.  It  affirms 
that  a  Divine  assistance,  proportionate  to  the  bur- 
den of  the  primacy,  is  attached  to  it  as  a  condition 
of  its  ordinary  exercise  in  bonum  Ecclesice.  The 
freedom  as  well  as  the  prudence  of  the  Pontiffs,  in 
selecting  the  means  of  exercising  their  office  of 
universal  Doctor,  is  carefully  expressed  in  the 
fourth  Chapter  of  this  Constitution.  "  The  Roman 
Pontiffs,  as  the  state  of  times  and  events  induced 
them,  sometimes  by  convoking  (Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils, or  by  ascertaining  the  mind  of  the  Church  dis- 
persed throughout  the  world,  sometimes  by  local 
Synods,  sometimes  by  employing  other  helps 
which  Divine  providence  supplied,  have  defined 
as  truths  to  be  held,  such  things  as  they  by  God's 
assistance  knew  to  be  in  harmony  with  the  Scrip- 
tures and  Apostolical  traditions."*    ■ 

It  may  be  well  here  to  add  two  passages  which 
complete  this  subject. 

Melchior  Canus  says :  "  Inasmuch  as  God  pro- 
mised firmness  of  faith  to  the  Church,  He  cannot 
be  wanting  to  it,  so  as  not  to  bestow  upon  the 
Church  prayers  and  other  helps  whereby  that 
firmness  is  preserved.  Nor  can  it  be  doubted  that 
what  happens  in  natural  things,  the  same  occurs 
in  supernatural;  namely,  that  he  who  gives  the 
end  gives  the  means  to  the  end." 


*  Coustit.  Dogmat.  Prima,  de  £ccL  Christi,  cap.  iv. 


ii6 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


"  If  God  should  promise  an  abundant  harvest 
next  year,  what  could  be  more  foolish  than  to 
doubt  whether  men  would  sow  seeds  in  the  earth  ? 
So  will  I  never  admit  that  either  Pontiff  or  Coun- 
cil have  omitted  any  necessary  diligence  in  decid- 
ing questions  of  faith.  It  might  happen  to  any 
private  man,  that  he  should  not  use  diligent  atten- 
tion in  seeking  truth,  and  yet  to  do  so  should  en- 
tirely give  himself  to  the  work,  and,  though  his 
error  be  inculpable,  nevertheless  fall  into  error. 
But  even  inculpable  error  is  far  from  the  Church 
of  God,  as  we  have  proved  in  a  former  book. 
Which  fact  is  an  abundant  argument  that  neither 
Pontiff  nor  Council  has  omitted,  in  deliberation, 
any  necessary  thing."  "  Let  us  therefore  grant 
that  to  the  Judges  constituted  by  God  in  the 
Church,  none  of  those  things  can  be  wanting 
which  are  necessary  for  a  right  and  true  judg- 
ment."* 


*  "  Cum  EcclesiaD  fidei  firmitatem  fuerit  pollicitus,  deesse  non 
potest  quominus  tribuat  Ecclesiae  pieces,  cseteraque  praesidia,  quibus 
hsec  finnitas  conservatur.  Nee  vero  dubitari  potest,  quod  in  rebus 
naturalibus  contingit,  idem  in  supernaturalibus  usu  venire  ;  ut  qui 
dat  finem,  det  consequentia  ad  finem. — Quod  si  Deus  in  sequentem 
annum  frugum  abundantiam  polliceretur,  ecquid  stultius  esse  posset 
quam  dubitare,  anne  homines  semina  terrse  mandaturi  sint  ? — Ita 
nunquam  ego  admittam  aut  Pontificem  aut  concilium  diligentiam 
all  quam  necessariam  quoestionibus  fidei  decernendis  omisisse.  Id 
quod  privato  cuicunque  alteri  liomini  accidere  potest,  ut  nee  dili- 
gcntem  navet  operam  ad  disquirendam  veretatem,  et  ut  navaverit 
jntegrumque  sese  in  ea  re  prajsterit,  errat  ad  hue  tamen,  quamvis 
error  sine  culpa  sit.  Error  autem  vel  inculpatus  ab  Ecclesia  Dei 
longissime  abest,  quemadmodum  libro  superiore  constituimus.  Qua) 
res  abunde  magno  argumento  est  ut  nee  I'ontifex  nee  concilia  ne- 
cessarium  quicquam  in  deliberando  pnetermiserint. — Concedamus 
ergo  judicibus  a  Deo  in  Ecclesia  constitutis  nihil  eorum  deeBse 


DOCTRINE   OF  INFALLIBILITY. 


117 


larvest 
lan  to 
earth  ? 

Coun- 

decid- 
to  any 

atten- 
ild  en- 
gh  his 

error. 

hurch 

book, 
leither 
ration, 

grant 
in  the 
anting 
'  jud^ 


Jg- 


esse  non 
a,  quibus 
in  rebus 
! ;  ut  qui 
quentem 
se  posset 
nt  ?— Ita 
igentiam 
isse.  Id 
nee  dili- 
lavaverit 
quamvis 
esia  Dei 
lus.  Quas 
icilia  ne- 
cedamus 
a  deeese 


Cerboni,  a  theologian  of  the  Dominican  order, 
says: 

"When  once  anything  of  faith  has  been  defined 
by  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  it  is  not  permitted  to 
doubt  whether  he  has  used  all  diligence  before 
such  definition." 

"  It  absolutely  cannot  be  said,  that  the  means 
necessary  for  the  Supreme  Pontiff  in  the  investiga- 
tion of  truth  have  been  neglected  by  him,  even 
though  he  should  be  supposed  to  have  defined 
anything  ex  cathcdray  without  first  seeking  the 
judgment  of  others." 

"  The  privilege  of  infallibility,  when  the  Supreme 
Pontiff  defines  anything  ex  cathedra,  is  to  be  as- 
cribed not  to  those  whom  he  has  previously  con- 
sulted, but  to  the  Roman  Pontiff  himself. 

"  Inasmuch  as  the  truth  and  certainty  of  those 
things  which  are  defined  *  ex  cathedra  '  depend  on 
the  authority  and  infallibility  of  the  Supreme  Pon- 
tiff, it  is  not  necessarily  requisite,  that  he  should 
first  consult  these  (counsellors)  rather  than  others, 
this  rather  than  that  body,  concerning  the  matter 
which  he  is  about  to  define  ex  cathedra."* 

posse,  quae  ad  rectum  verumque  judicium  sunt  necessaria." — Mel- 
chior  Canus,  Be  Loch  Theol.,  lib.  v.  cap.  5,  pp.  120, 131,  Venice,  1776, 

*  "  Semel  ac  a  Summo  Pontifice  quidpiam  ad  fidem  spectans 
definitum  habeatur,  dubitare  non  licet,  utrum  omnem  diligentiam 
anti  liujusmodi  definitionem  ille  prsemiserit. 

Quaj  ad  investigandam  veritatem  media  in  summo  Pontifice  re- 
quiruntur,  ab  eo  neglecta  fuisse,  absolute  dici  non  potest,  etiamsi 
aliorum  non  exquisita  sententia  qmdpiam  ex  cathedra  definiisse 
prtesupponatur. 

Privilegium  infallibilitatis,  dum  a  Summo  Pontifice  aliquid  ex 
cathedra  definitur,  non  iis  qui  antea  consulti  fuerint,  sed  ipsi  Romano 
Pontifici  tribui  debet. 

Ex  eo  quod  Veritas  et  certitude  eorum  quse  ex  cathedra  detiniun- 


:■!;: 


if 


I 


ii8 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


From  all  that  has  been  said,  three  things  are  be- 
yond question  ;  firr".  that  the  privilege  of  infalli- 
bility in  the  head  of  the  Church,  neither  by  its 
possession  nor  by  its  exercise,  can  in  any  way  im- 
port separation  or  disunion  between  the  head  and 
the  body.  Such  a  supposition  involves,  as  we  have 
seen,  heretical  notions  at  every  turn.  The  very 
reverse  is  true :  that  the  supreme  privilege  of  in- 
fallibility in  the  head  is  the  divinely  ordained 
means  to  sustain  for  ever  the  unity  of  the  Univer- 
sal Church  in  communion,  faith,  and  doctrine. 

And  further,  that  the  independent  exercise  of 
this  privilege  by  the  head  of  the  Episcopate,  and  as 
distinct  from  the  Bishops,  is  the  divinely  ordained 
means  of  the  perpetual  unity  of  the  Episcopate  in 
communion  and  faith  with  its  head  and  with  its 
own  members. 

And  lastly,  that  though  the  consent  of  the  Epis- 
copate or  the  Church  be  not  required,  as  a  con- 
dition, to  the  intrinsic  value  of  the  infallible  defin- 
itions of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  nevertheless,  it  cannot 
without  heresy  be  said  or  conceived  that  the  con- 
sent of  the  Episcopate  and  of  the  Church  can  ever 
be  absent.  For  if  the  Pontiff  be  divinely  assisted, 
both  the  active  and  passive  infallibility  of  the 
Church  exclude  such  a  supposition  as  heretical. 
To  deny  such  infallible  assistance  now  after  the 
definition,  is  heresy.     And  even  before  the  defin- 

tur,  a  Summi  Pontificis  auctoritato  ct  infallibilitate  pendeant  non 
necessario  requiritur,  ut  Summns  Poutifex  do  eo  quod  est  ex 
cathedra  definitiirus,  lios  vol  illos  potius  quam  alios  hunc  vel  ilium 
ca3tuin  prie  alio  antea  consulat." — Cerboni,  De  Jure  et  Legiim  Dis- 
ciplina,  lib.  2!},  cap.  6,  apud  Bianchi  do  constitutiono  mon.  Ecclcs. 
p.  158.    Rome,  1870. 


DOCTRINE  OF  INFALLIBILITY. 


119 


ition,  to  deny  it  was  proximate  to  heresy,  because 
it  was  a  revealed  truth,  and  a  Divine  fact,  on  which 
the  unity  of  the  Church  has  depended  from  the 
beginning. 

From  what  has  been  said,  the  precise  meaning 
of  the  terms  before  us  may  be  easily  fixed. 

1.  The  privilege  of  iniaWibility  is  />erso7ia/,  inas- 
much as  it  attaches  to  the  Roman  Pontiff,  the  suc- 
cessor of  Peter,  as  t^  public  person,  distinct  from,  but 
inseparably  united  to,  the  Church  ;  but  it  is  not  per- 
sonal, in  that  it  is  attached,  not  to  the  private  per- 
son, but  to  the  primacy,  which  he  alone  possesses. 

2.  It  is  also  independent,  inasmuch  as  it  does  not 
depend  upon  either  the  Ecclesia  docens  or  the  Ecclesia 
discens  ;  but  it  is  not  independent,  in  that  it  depends 
in  all  things  upon  the  Divine  Head  of  the  Church, 
upon  the  institution  of  the  primacy  by  Him,  and 
upon  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

3.  It  is  absolute,  inasmuch  as  it  can  be  circum- 
scribed by  no  human  or  ecclesiastical  law  ;  it  is  not 
absolute,  in  that  it  is  circumscribed  by  the  office  of 
guarding,  expounding,  and  defending  the  deposit 
of  revelation.  .  :     , 

4.  It  is  separate  in  no  sense,  nor  can  be,  nor  can 
so  be  called,  without  manifold  .heresy,  unless  the 
word  be  taken  to  mean  distinct.  In  this  sense,  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is  distinct  from  the  Episcopate,  and 
is  a  distinct  subject  of  infallibility ;  and  in  the  exer- 
cise of  his  supreme  doctrinal  authority,  or  magis- 
tcrium,  he  does  not  depend  for  the  infallibility  of 
his  definitions  upon  the  consent  or  consultation  of 
the  Episcopate,  but  only  on  the  Divine  assistance 
of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

SCIENTIFIC   HISTORY  AND   THE   CATHOLIC   RULE 

OF  FAITH. 


It  may  here  be  well  to  answer  an  objection  which 
is  commonly  supposed  to  lie  against  the  doctrine 
of  the  Pontifical  Infallibility ;  namely,  that  the  evi- 
dence of  history  is  opposed  to  it. 

The  answer  is  twofold. 

I.  First,  that  the  evidence  of  history  distinctly 
proves  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff. 

I  shall  be  told  that  this  is  to  beg  the  question. 

To  which  I  answer,  they  also  who  affirm  the  con- 
trary beg  the  question. 

Both  sides  appeal  to  history,  and  with  equal  con- 
fidence ;  sometimes  with  equal  clamor,  and  often 
equally  in  vain. 

By  some  people  "  The  Pope  and  the  Council," 
by  Janus,  is  regarded  as  the  most  unanswerable 
work  of  scientific  history  hitherto  published. 

By  others  it  is  regarded  as  the  shallowest  and 
most  pretentious  book  of  the  day. 

Between  such  contradictory  judgments  who  is 
to  decide  ?  Is  there  any  tribunal  of  pppeal  in  mat- 
ters of  history  ?  or  is  there  no  ultimate  judge  ?  Is 
history  a  road  where  no  one  can  err ;  or  is  it  a  wilder- 
ness in  which  we  must  wander  without  guide  or 

(120) 


SCIENTIFIC   HISTORY,   ETC. 


121 


path  ?  Are  we  all  left  to  private  judgment  alone  ? 
If  any  one  say,  that  there  is  no  judge  but  right 
reason  or  common  sense,  he  is  only  reproducing  in 
history  what  Luther  applied  to  the  Bible. 

This  theory  may  be  intellectually  and  morally 
possible  to  those  who  are  not  Catholics.  In  Catho- 
lics such  a  theory  is  simple  heresy.  That  there  is 
an  ultimate  judge  in  such  matters  of  history  as 
affect  the  truths  of  revelation,  is  a  dogma  of  faith. 
But  into  this  we  will  enter  hereafter. 

For  the  present,  I  will  make  only  one  other  ob- 
servation. 

Let  us  suppose  that  the  divinity  of  our  Lord 
were  in  controversy.  Let  us  suppose  that  two 
hundred  and  fifty-six  passages  from  the  Fathers 
were  adduced  to  prove  that  Jesus  Christ  is  God. 
These  two  hundred  and  fifty-six  passages,  we  will 
say,  may  be  distributed  into  three  classes  ;  the  first 
consisting  of  a  great  number,  in  which  the  divinity 
of  our  Lord  is  explicitly  and  unmistakably  declared ; 
the  second,  a  greater  number  which  so  assume  or 
imply  it  as  to  be  inexplicable  upon  any  other  hy- 
pothesis ;  the  third,  also  numerous,  capable  of  the 
same  interpretation,  and  incapable  of  the  contrary 
interpretation,  though  in  themselves  inexplicit. 

We  will  suppose,  next,  one  passage  to  exist  in 
some  one  of  the  Fathers,  the  aspect  of  which  is  ad- 
verse. Its  language  is  apparently  contradictory  to 
the  hypothesis  that  Jesus  Christ  is  God.  Its  terms 
are  explicit ;  and,  if  taken  at  the  letter,  cannot  be 
reconciled  with  the  doctrine  of  His  divinity. 

I  need  only  remind  you  of  St.  Justin  Martyr's 
argument  that  the  Angel  who  appeared  to  Moses 
in  the  bush  could  not  be  the  Father,  but  the  Son, 
6 


122 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


m  a 


because  the  Father  could  not  be  manifested 
narrow  space  on  earth  ;"*  or  even  of  the  words  of 
our  Divine  Lord  Himself,  "  The  Father  is  greater 

than  I."t 

Now,  I  would  ask,  what  course  would  any  man 
of  just  and  considerate  intelligence  pursue  in  such 

a  case  ? 

Would  he  say,  one  broken  link  destroys  a  chain  ? 
One  such  passage  adverse  to  the  divinity  of  Christ 
outweighs  two  hundred  and  fifty-six  passages  to 
the  contrary  ? 

Would  this  be  scientific  history?  or  would  it  be 
scientific  to  assume  that  the  one  passage,  however 
apparently  explicit  and  adverse,  can  bear  only  one 
sense,  and  cannot  in  any  other  way  be  explained  ? 
If  so,  scientific  historians  are  bound  to  the  literal 
prima  facie  sense  of  the  words  of  St.  Justin  Martyr, 
and  of  our  Lord  above  quoted. 

Still,  supposing  the  one  passage  to  remain  ex- 
plicit and  adverse,  and  therefore  an  insoluble  diffi- 
culty, I  would  ask  whether  any  but  a  Socinian, 
vTTodioEi  dovXevwVj  servilely  bound,  and  pledged  by 
the  perverseness  of  controversy,  would  reject  the 
whole  cumulus  of  explicit  and  constructive  evi- 
dence contained  in  two  hundred  and  fifty-six  pas- 
sages, because  of  one  adverse  passage  of  insoluble 
difficulty?  People  must  be  happily  unconscious 
of  the  elements  which  underlie  the  whole  basis  of 
their  most  confident  beliefs  if  they  would  so  pro- 
ceed. But  into  this  I  will  not  enter  now.  Enough 
to  say,  that  such  a  procedure  would  be  so  far  from 


*  Dialog,  cum  Trypb.  sect.  60,  p.  157.    Ed.  Ben.  Paris,  1742. 

t  St.  Jobu  xiv.  28. 


SCIENTIFIC  HISTORY,   ETC. 


123 


scientific  that  it  would  be  superficial,  unintellectual, 
and  absurd.  I  would  ask,  then,  is  it  science,  or  is 
it  passion,  to  reject  the  cumulus  of  evidence  which 
surrounds  the  infallibility  of  two  hundred  and  fifty- 
six  pontiffs,  because  of  the  case  of  Honorius,  even 
if  supposed  to  be  an  insoluble  difficulty?  Real 
science  would  teach  us  that  in  the  most  certain 
systems  there  are  residual  phenomena  which  long 
remain  as  insoluble  difficulties,  without  in  the  least 
diminishing  the  certainty  of  the  system  itself. 

But,  further,  the  case  of  Honorius  is  not  an  in- 
soluble difficulty. 

In  the  judgment  of  a  cloud  of  the  greatest  theo- 
logians of  all  countries,  schools,  and  languages, 
since  the  controversy  was  opened  two  hundred 
years  ago,  the  case  of  Honorius  has  been  com- 
pletely solved.  Nay  more,  it  has  been  used  with 
abundant  evidence,  drawn  from  the  very  same  acts 
and  documents,  to  prove  the  direct  contrary  hypo- 
thesis, namely,  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  pon- 
tiffs. But  into  this  again  I  shall  not  enter.  It  is 
enough  for  my  present  argument  to  affirm  that  in- 
asmuch as  the  case  of  Honorius  has  been  for  cen- 
turies disputed,  it  is  disputable.  Again,  inasmuch 
as  it  has  been  interpreted  with  equal  confidence  for 
and  against  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  pontiff — 
and  I  may  add  that  they  who  have  cleared  Honor- 
ius of  personal  heresy,  are  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority compared  with  their  opponents,  and  let  it 
be  said  for  argument's  sake,  and  with  more  than 
moderation,  that  the  probability  of  their  interpre- 
tations at  least  equals  that  of  the  opponents — for  all 
these  reasons  I  may,  with  safety,  affirm  that,  if  the 
case  of  Honorius  be  not  solved,  it  is  certainly  not 


124 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


insoluble ;  and  that  the  long,  profuse,  and  confident 
controversy  of  men  whom  I  will  assume  to  be  sin- 
cere, reasonable,  and  learned  on  both  sides,  proves 
beyond  question  that  the  case  of  Honorius  is 
doubtful. 

I  would  ask,  then,  is  it  scientific,  or  passionate  to 
reject  the  cumulus  of  evidence  surrounding  the 
line  of  two  hundred  and  fifty-six  pontiffs,  because 
one  case  may  be  found  which  is  doubtful  ?  doubt- 
ful, too,  be  it  remembered,  only  on  the  theory  that 
history  is  a  wilderness  without  guide  or  path  ;  in 
no  way  doubtful  to  those  who,  as  a  dogma  of  faith, 
believe  that  the  revelation  of  faith  was  anterior  to 
its  history  and  is  independent  of  it,  being  divinely 
secured  by  the  presence  and  assistance  of  Him 
who  gave  it. 

And  this  is  a  sufficient  answer  to  the  case  of 
Honorius,  which  of  all  controversies  is  the  most 
useless,  barren,  and  irrelevant. 

I  should  hardly  have  thought,  at  this  time  of 
day,  that  any  theologian  or  scholar  would  have 
brought  up  again  the  cases  of  Vigilius,  Liberius, 
John  XXII.,  etc.  But  as  these  often-refuted  and 
senseless  contentions  have  been  renewed,  I  give  in 
the  note  references  to  the  works  and  places  in 
which  they  are  abundantly  answered.* 

Such  is  the  first  part  of  the  answer  to  the  alleged 
opposition  of  history. 

2.  We  will  now  proceed  to  the  second  and  more 
complete  reply. 

The  true  and  conclusive  answer  to  this  objection 
consists,  not  in  detailed  refutation  of  alleged  diffi- 


*  Appendix,  p.  244. 


SCIENTIFIC  HISTORY,   ETC. 


i?S 


rius   IS 


culties,  but  in  a  principle  of  faith ;  namely,  that 
whensoever  any  doctrine  is  contained  in  the  Divine 
tradition  of  the  Church,  all  difficulties  from  human 
history  are  excluded,  as  Tertullian  lays  down,  by 
prescription.  The  only  source  of  revealed  truth 
is  God,  the  only  channel  of  His  revelation  is  the 
Church.  No  human  history  can  declare  what  is 
contained  in  that  revelation.  The  Church  alone 
can  determine  its  limits,  and  therefore  its  contents. 

When  then  the  Church,  out  of  the  proper  foun- 
tains of  truth,  the  Word  of  God,  written  and  unwrit- 
ten, declares  any  doctrine  to  be  revealed,  no  difficul- 
ties of  human  history  can  prevail  against  it.  I  have 
before  said :  "  The  pretentious  historical  criticism 
of  these  days  has  prevailed,  and  will  prevail,  to  un- 
dermine the  peace  and  the  confidence,  and  even 
the  faith  of  some.  But  the  city  seated  on  a  hill  is 
still  there,  high  and  out  of  reach,  It  cannot  be  hid, 
and  is  its  own  evidence,  anterior  to  its  history,  and  in- 
dependent of  it.  Its  history  is  to  be  learned  of  it- 
self." "  It  is  not  therefore  by  criticism  on  past  his- 
tory, but  by  acts  of  faith  in  the  living  voice  of  the 
Church  at  this  hour,  that  we  can  know  the  faith."* 

On  these  words  of  mine,  Quirinus  makes  the 
following  not  very  profound  remark :  "  The  faith 
which  removes  mountains  will  be  equally  ready — 
such  is  clearly  his  meaning — to  make  away  with 
the  facts  of  history.  Whether  any  German  Bishop 
will  be  found  to  offer  his  countrymen  these  stones 
to  digest,  time  will  show."  f  Time  has  shown,  faster 
than  Quirinus  looked  for.  The  German  Bishops 
at  Fulda,  in  their  pastoral  letter  on  the  Council, 

*  Pastoral,  etc.,  18G9,  p.  125. 

f  Letters  from  Rome,  etc.,  bj  Quirinus,  sccpnd  series,  p.  348-9. 


126 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


li 


'H 


! 


II  III 


speak  as  follows :  "  To  maintain  that  either  the  one 
or  the  other  of  the  doctrines  decided  by  the  Gen- 
eral Council  is  not  contained  in  the  Holy  Scripture, 
and  in  the  tradition  of  the  Church — those  two 
sources  of  the  Catholic  faith — or  that  they  are  even 
in  opposition  to  the  same,  is  a  first  step,  irreconcila- 
ble with  the  very  first  principles  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  which  leads  to  separation  from  her  com- 
munion. Wherefore,  we  hereby  declare  that  the 
present  Vatican  Council  is  a  legitimate  General 
Council ;  and,  jnoreover,  that  this  Council,  as  little 
as  any  other  General  Council,  has  propounded  or 
formed  a  new  doctrine  at  variance  with  the  ancient 
teaching,  but  has  simply  developed  and  thrown 
light  upon  the  old  and  faithfully-preserved  truth 
contained  in  the  deposit  of  faith,  and  in  opposition 
to  the  errors  of  the  day  has  proposed  it  expressly 
to  the  belief  of  all  faithful  people ;  and,  lastly,  that 
these  decrees  have  received  a  binding  power  on  all 
the  faithful  by  the  fact  of  their  final  publication  by 
the  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  in  solemn  form 
at  the  Public  Session."  * 

Let  us,  then,  go  on  to  examine  the  relation  of 
history  to  faith. 

The  objection  from  history  has  been  stated  in 
these  words:  "There  are  grave  difficulties,  from 
the  words  and  acts  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church, 
from  the  genuine  documents  of  history,^  and  from 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church  itself,  which  must  be 
altogether  solved,  before  the  doctrine  of  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Roman  Pontiff  can  be  proposed  to  the 
faithful  as  a  doctrine  revealed  by  God." 

*"Tiines,"Sept.  23, 1870 


SCIENTIFIC  HISTORY,  ETC. 


127 


the  one 
le  Gen- 
ripture, 
•se  two 
re  even 
:oncila- 
■atholic 
ir  com- 
lat  the 
eneral 
IS  little 
ided  or 
ancient 
thrown 
1  truth 
(osition 
pressly 
ly,  that 
r  on  all 
tion  by 
n  form 

tion  of 

ited  in 
,  from 
hurch, 
d  from 
lust  be 
infalli- 
to  the 


Are  we  to  understand  from  this  that  the  words 
and  acts  of  the  Fathers,  and  the  documents  of  hu- 
man history,  constitute  the  Rule  of  Faith,  or  that 
the  Rule  of  Faith  depends  upon  them,  and  is  either 
more  or  less  certain  as  it  agrees  or  disagrees  with 
them  ?  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  rule  of  faith  is 
to  be  tested  by  history,  not  history  by  the  rule  of 
faith  ?  If  this  be  so,  then  they  who  so  argue  lay 
down  as  a  theological  principle  that  the  doctrinal 
authority  of  the  Church,  and  therefore  the  certainty 
of  dogma,  depends,  if  not  altogether,  at  least  in 
part,  on  human  history.  From  this  it  would  follow 
that  when  critical  or  scientific  historians  find,  or 
suppose  themselves  to  find,  a  difficulty  in  the  writ- 
ings of  the  Father  or  other  human  histories,  the 
doctrines  proposed  by  the  Church  as  of  Divine 
revelation  are  to  be  called  into  doubt,  unless  such 
difficulties  can  be  solved.  The  gravity  of  this  ob- 
jection is  such,  that  the  principle  on  which  it  rests 
is  undoubtedly  either  a  doctrine  of  faith  or  a  heresy. 

In  order  to  determine  whether  it  be  the  one  or 
the  other,  let  us  examine  first  what  is  the  authority 
and  place  of  human  history. 

To  do  so  surely  and  shortly,  I  will  transcribe  the 
rules  of  Melchior  Canus,  which  may  be  taken  as 
the  doctrine  of  all  theological  Schools. 

The  eleventh  chapter  of  his  work  "  De  Locis 
Theologicis,"  is  entitled  "  de  Humanae  Historise 
Auctoritate."  In  it  he  lays  down  the  following 
principles: 

I.  "Excepting  the  sacred  authors,  no  historian 
can  be  certain,  that  is,  sufficient  to  constitute  a  cer- 
tain faith  in  theological  matter.    As  this  is  obvious 


128 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


and  manifest  to  every  one,  it  has  no  need  to  be 
proved  by  our  arguments. 

2.  "  Historians  of  weight,  and  worthy  of  confi- 
dence, as  some  without  doubt  have  been,  both  in 
Ecclesiastical  and  in  secular  matters,  furnish  to  a 
theologian,  a  probable  argument. 

3.  "  If  all  approved  historians  of  weight  concur 
in  the  same  narrative  of  an  event,  then  from  their 
authority  a  certain  argument  can  be  educed,  so  that 
the  dogmas  of  theology  may  be  confirmed  also  by 
reason." 

Let  us  apply  these  rules  to  the  case  of  Honorius, 
and  to  the  alleged  historical  difficulties.  Is  this 
one  in  which  "all  approved  historians  of  weight 
concur  in  the  same  narration  of  events?"  In  the 
case  of  Honorius,  it  is  well  known  that  great  dis- 
crepancy prevails  among  historical  critics.  The 
histories  themselves  are  of  doubtful  interpretation. 
But  the  Rule  of  Faith  is  the  Divine  tradition  of 
revelation  proposed  to  us  by  the  magisteriiim,  or 
doctrinal  authority,  of  the  Church.  Against  this, 
no  such  historical  difficulties  can  prevail.  Into  this 
they  cannot  enter.  They  are  excluded,  as  I  have 
said,  by  a  prescription  which  has  its  origin  in  the 
Divine  institution  of  the  Church.  The  revelation 
of  the  faith,  and  the  institution  of  the  Church,  were 
both  perfect  and  complete,  not  only  before  human 
histories  existed,  but  even  before  the  inspired 
Scriptures  were  written.  The  Church  itself  is  the 
Divine  witness,  teacher,  and  judge,  of  the  revela- 
tion entrusted  to  it.  There  exists  no  other.  There 
is  no  tribunal  to  which  appeal  from  the  Church  can 

*  Melcliior  Canus,  Lod  theol.  lib.  xi.  c.  4. 


SCIENTIFIC  HISTORY,   ETC. 


to  be 


129 


lie.  There  is  no  co-ordinate  witness,  teacher,  or 
judge,  who  can  revise,  or  criticise,  or  test,  the 
teaching  of  the  Church.  It  is  sole  and  alone  in  the 
world.  And  to  it  may  be  applied  the  words  of  St. 
Paul,  as  St.  John  Chrysostom  has  applied  them : 
"  The  spiritual  man  judgeth  all  things-  and  he  him- 
self is  judged  by  no  one."  ThQ  Ecciesia  docefis,  or 
the  pastors  of  the  Church,  with  their  head,  are  a 
witness  divinely  sustained  and  guided  to  guard 
and  to  declare  the  faith.  They  were  antecedent  to 
history,  and  are  independent  of  it.  The  sources 
from  which  they  draw  their  testimony  of  the 
faith  are  not  in  human  histories,  but  in  Apostolical 
tradition,  in  Scripture,  in  Creeds,  in  the  Liturgy, 
in  the  public  worship  and  law  of  the  Church,  in 
Councils ;  and  in  the  interpretation  of  all  these 
things  by  the  supreme  authority  of  the  Church 
itself. 

The  Church  has  indeed  a  history.  Its  course  and 
its  acts  have  been  recorded  by  human  hands.  It 
has  its  annals,  like  the  empire  of  Rome  or  of  Brit- 
ain. But  its  history  is  no  more  than  its  footprints 
in  time,  which  record  indeed,  but  cause  nothing 
and  create  nothing. 

The  tradition  of  the  Church  may  be  historically 
treated ;  but  between  history  and  the  tradition  of 
the  Church  there  is  a  clear  distinction.  The  school 
of  scientific  historians,  if  I  understand  it,  lays  down 
as  a  principle  that  history  is  tradition,  and  tradition 
history  :  that  they  are  one  and  the  same  thing  un- 
der two  names.  This  seems  so  be  the  Trpdrov  ipevdog 
of  their  system ;  it  is  a  tacit  elimination  of  the 
supernatural,  and  of  the  Divine  authority  of  the 
Church. 


130 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


I 


( 


II' 


The  tradition  of  the  Church  is  not  human  in  its 
origin,  in  its  perpetuity,  in  its  immutability.  The 
matter  of  that  tradition  is  Divine.  But  history,  ex- 
cepting so  far  as  it  is  contained  in  the  tradition  of 
the  Church,  is  not  Divine  but  human,  and  human 
in  its  mutabihty,  uncertainty,  and  corruption.  The 
matter  of  it  is  human.  Under  the  name  "  tradition" 
come  two  elements  altogether  Divine;  namely, 
that  which  is  handed  down  as  the  Word  of  God 
written  and  unwritten,  and  the  mode  of  handing  it 
down,  which  is  the  "  magisterium"  or  teaching  au- 
thority of  the  Church.  But  against  neither  the  one 
nor  the  other  of  these  things  can  human  histories, 
written  by  men  not  inspired  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
not  seldom  inspired  by  any  other  than  the  Soirit 
of  God,  prevail ;  because  against  the  Church  tne 
gates  of  hell  cannot  prevail.  The  visible  Church 
itself  is  Divine  tradition.  It  is  also  the  Divine  de- 
pository, and  the  Divine  guardian  of  Faith.  But 
this  Divine  tradition  contains  both  the  "  Ecclesia 
docens  "  and  the  "  Ecclesia  discens ;"  both  infaUible, 
the  latter  passively,  the  former  passively  and  act- 
ively, by  the  perpetual  assistance  of  the  Spirit  of 
Truth.  It  contains  also  the  Creed  of  the  Universal 
Church,  the  decrees  of  Pontiffs,  the  definitions  of 
Councils,  the  common  and  constant  doctrine  of 
the  Church  delivered  by  its  living  voice  in  all  the 
world,  of  which  our  Divine  Lord  said,  "  He  that 
heareth  you,  heareth  Me."* 

Now  if  this  be  so,  of  what  weight  or  authority  is 
human  hiistory  in  matters  of  faith  ? 

For  instance,  the  Vatican  Council  affirms  that  the 

*  See  Appendix,  p.  199. 


;? 


SCIENTIFIC   HISTORY,   ETC. 


131 


doctrine  of  the  immutable  stability  of  Peter  and  of 
his  successors  in  the  faith,  and  therefore  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Roman  Pontiff  in  matters  of  faith  and 
morals,  in  virtue  of  a  Divine  assistance  promised  to 
St.  Peter,  and  in  Peter  to  his  successors,  is  a  re- 
vealed truth. 

What  has  human  history  to  say  to  this  declara- 
tion? Human  history  is  neither  the  source  nor  the 
channel  of  revelation. 

Scientific  history  may,  however,  mean  a  scientific 
handling  of  the  Divine  tradition  and  the  authorita- 
tive documents  of  the  Church.  But  before  these 
things  can  be  thus  scientifically  handled,  they  must 
be  first  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  Church  by  the 
hands  of  the  scientific  critics.  And  this  simply 
amounts  to  saying :  "  You  are  the  Catholic  Church 
indeed,  and  possess  these  documents  and  histories 
of  your  own  past.  But  either  you  do  not  know  the 
meaning  of  them,  because  you  are  not  scientific,  or 
you  will  not  declare  the  real  meaning  of  them,  be- 
cause you  are  not  honest.  We  are  the  men ;  hon- 
esty and  science  is  with  us,  if  it  will  not  die  with 
us.  Hand  over  your  documents,  the  forged  and 
the  true  ;  the  forgeries  we  will  find  out ;  the  true  we 
will  interpret ;  and  by  science  we  will  prove  that 
you  have  erred  and  led  the  world  into  error ;  and 
therefore  that  your  claim  to  be  a  Divine  tradition, 
anci  to  have  a  Divine  authority,  is  an  imposture. 
The  case  of  Honorius  alone  is  enough.  You  say 
that  Pope  Leo  and  Pope  Agatho  interpreted  the 
Councils  of  Constantinople  so  as  to  show,  that  what- 
ever faults  of  infirmity  were  in  Honorius,  a  doctrinal 
heretic  he  was  not.  We,  by  scientific  treatment  of 
history,  have  proved  that  your  contemporaneous 


132 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


I    il 


Popes  were  wrong ;  and  we  are  scientifically  right 
in  declaring  that  Honorius  was  a  heretic,  not  in  a 
large,  but  in  a  strict  sense,  not  only  as  a  private  per- 
son, but  as  a  pope,  '  ex  cathedra :'  and  therefore 
that  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  is  a  fable." 

But  why  should  the  school  of  scientific  history 
prevail  over  theiiimiemorial  tradition  of  the  Church, 
even  in  a  matter  of  fact  ? 

And  how  can  it  prevail  over  the  definition  of  the 
Vatican  Council,  except  by  claiming  to  be  infallible, 
or  denying  the  infalUbility  of  the  Catholic  Church  ? 

And  here  lies  the  true  issue.  My  purpose  has 
been  to  bring  out  this  one  point,  namely,  that  under 
this  pretext  of  scientific  history  lurks  an  assump- 
tion which  is  purely  heretical.  It  has  already  des- 
troyed the  faith  of  some ;  and  will  that  of  more. 
Our  duty  is  to  expose  it,  and  to  put  the  faithful  on 
their  guard  against  what  I  believe  to  be  the  last  and 
most  subtle  form  of  Protestantism.  This  school  of 
error  has  partly  sprung  up  in  Germany  by  contact 
with  Protestantism,  and  partly  in  England  by  the 
agency  of  those  who,  being  born  in  Protestantism, 
have  entered  the  Catholic  Church,  but  have  never 
been  liberated  from  certain  erroneous  habits  of 
thought. 

The:  first  form  of  Protestantism  was  to  appeal 
from  the  Divine  authority  of  the  Church  to  the  text 
of  Scripture :  that  is,  from  the  interpretation  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures  traditionally  declared  b}''  the 
Church,  to  the  interpretation  of  private  judgment. 
This  is  the  pure  Lutheran  or  Calvinistic  Protest- 
antism. 

The  next  was,  to  appeal  from  the  Divine  author- 
ity of  the  Church  to  the  faith  of  the  undivided 


SCIENTIFIC   HISTORY,   ETC. 


133 


Church  before  the  separation  of  the  East  and  West. 
Such  was  the  Anglican  Protestantism  of  Jewell  and 
others. 

The  third  was,  to  appeal  from  the  Divine  author- 
ity of  the  Church  to  the  consent  of  the  Fathers,  to 
the  canons  of  Councils,  and  the  like.  Such  is  the 
more  modern  form  of  Anglicanism  ;  of  which  I 
wish  to  speak  with  all  charity,  for  the  sake  of  so 
many  whom  I  respect  and  love. 

Thus  far,  we  have  to  deal  with  those  who  are  not 
in  communion  with  the  Holy  See. 

But  there  has  been  growing  up,  both  in  Germany 
and  in  England,  a  school,  if  I  may  so  call  it,  not 
numerous  nor  likely  to  have  succession,  which 
places  itself  in  constant  antagonism  to  the  authority 
of  the  Church,  and,  to  justify  its  attitude  of  antag- 
onism, appeals  to  "  scientific  history."  "  The  Pope 
and  the  Council,"  by  Janus,  and  the  attacks  on 
Honorius  are  its  fruits.  These  were  all  avowedly 
written  to  prevent  the  definition  of  the  infallibility 
of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  It  was  an  attempt  to  bar 
the  advance  of  the  "  magisterium  Ecclesiae "  by 
scientific  history. 

Now,  before  the  definition  of  the  Vatican  Coun- 
cil, the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  was  a 
doctrine  revealed  by  God,  delivered  by  the  univer- 
sal and  constant  tradition  of  the  Church,  recog- 
nized in  CEcumenical  Councils,  pre-supposed  in  the 
acts  of  the  Pontiffs  in  all  ages,  taught  by  all  the 
Saints,  defended  by  every  religious  Order,  and  by 
every  theological  school  except  one,  and  in  that  one 
disputed  on'y  by  a  minority  in  number,  and  during 
one  period  of  its  history  ;  believed,  at  least  implic- 
iLiy,  by  all  the  faithful,  and  therefore  attested  by 


134 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


It 


ri  a 


i 


i 


the  passive  infallibility  of  the  Church  in  all  ages 
and  lands,  with  the  partial  and  transient  limitations 
already  expressed. 

The  doctrine  was  therefore  already  objectively 
de  fide,  and  also  subjectively  binding  in  conscience 
upon  all  who  knew  it  to  be  revealed. 

The  definition  has  added  nothing  to  its  intrinsic 
certainty,  for  this  is  dciived  from  Divine  revela- 
tion. 

It  has  added  only  the  extrinsic  certainty  of  uni- 
versal promulgation  by  the  Ecclesia  docer^,  impos- 
ing obligation  upon  all  the  faithful. 

Hitherto,  therefore,  the  authors  of  Janus,  and  the 
like,  who  appealed  to  scientific  history,  appealed 
indeed  from  the  doctrinal  authority  of  the  Church 
in  a  matter  of  revelation ;  but  they  may  be,  so  far 
as  God  knows  theii  good  faith,  protected  by  the 
plea  that  the  doctrine  had  not  yet  been  promul- 
gated by  a  definition. 

Nevertheless,  the  process  of  their  opposition  was 
essentially  heretical.  It  was  an  appeal  from  the 
traditional  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Church,  deliv- 
ered by  its  common  and  constant  teaching,  to  his- 
tory mterpreted  by  themselves. 

It  does  not  at  all  diminish  the  gravity  of  this  act 
to  say  that  the  appeal  was  not  to  mere  human  his- 
tory, nor  to  history  written  by  enemies,  but  to  the 
acts  of  Councils,  and  to  the  documents  of  Ecclesi- 
astical tradition. 

This  makes  the  opposition  more  formal ;  for  it 
amounts  to  an  assumption  that  scientific  history 
knows  the  mind  of  the  Clnirch,  and  is  better  able 
to  interpret  its  aces,  decrees,  condemnations,  and 
documents,  cither  by  superiority  of  scientific  criti- 


SCIENTIFIC   HISTORY,  ETC. 


135 


cism,  or  by  superiority  of  moral  honesty,  than  the 
Church  itself. 

But  surely  the  Church  best  knows  its  own  his- 
tory, and  the  true  sense  of  its  own  acts  and  docu- 
ments. 

The  Crown  of  England  would  make  short  work 
of  those  who  should  scientifically  interpret  the  un- 
written law,  or  the  acts  of  Parliament,  contrary  to 
judgment. 

Do  modern  critics  suppose  that  the  case  of  Hon- 
orious  is  as  new  to  the  Church  as  it  is  to  them,  or 
that  the  Church  has  not  a  traditional  knowledge  of 
the  value  and  bearing  of  the  case  upon  the  doc- 
trines of  faith  ? 

This,  again,  in  non-Catholics,  would  imply  no 
more  than  the  ordinary  want  of  knowledge  as  to 
the  Divine  nature  and  office  of  the  Church.  In 
Catholics  it  would  imply,  if  not  heresy,  at  least  a 
heretical  animus. 

If  the  Church  has  prohibited,  under  pain  of  ex- 
communication, any  appeal  from  the  Holy  See  to  a 
future  General  Council,  certainly  under  the  same 
censure  it  \vould  condemn  an  appeal  from  the  Coun- 
cil of  the  Vatican  to  the  Councils  of  Constantino- 
ple interpreted  by  scientific  history. 

It  is  of  faith  that  the  Church  alone  can  declare 
the  contents  and  the  limits  of  revelation,  and  can 
alone  determine  the  extent  of  its  own  infallibility. 
And  as  it  alone  can  judge  of  the  true  sense  and  in- 
terpretation of  Holy  Scripture,  it  alone  can  judge 
of  the  true  sense  and  interpretation  of  the  acts  of 
its  own  Pontifls  and  Councils. 

Under  the  same  head,  therefore,  and  under  the 
same  censure,  come  all  appeals  from  the  Divine  au- 


136  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

thority  of  the  Church  at  this  hour,  under  whatso- 
ever pretext  or  to  whatsoever  tribunal ;  whether  to 
Councils  in  the  future  or  the  past,  or  to  Scripture 
or  the  Fathers,  or  to  unauthentic  interpretations  of 
the  acts  of  Councils,  or  to  documents  of  human 
history. 

This  being  so,  it  cannot  be  said  that  there  exist 
grave  difficulties  from  the  words  and  acts  of  the 
Fathers,  from  the  genuine  documents  of  history, 
and  from  the  Catholic  doctrine  itself,  which  if  not 
solved,  \vould  render  it  impossible  to  propose  to  the 
faithful  as  a  doctrine,  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff;  because  it  was  contained  before  definition, 
in  the  universal  and  constant  teaching  of  the  Church 
as  a  truth  of  revelation.  Who  is  the  competent 
judge  to  declare  whether  such  difficulties  really 
exist  ?  or,  if  they  exist,  what  is  the  value  of  them ; 
whether  they  be  grave  or  light,  relevant  or  irrelev- 
ant ?  Surely  it  belongs  to  the  Church  to  judge  of 
these  things.  They  are  so  inseparably  in  contact 
with  dogma,  that  the  deposit  of  faith  cannot  be 
guarded  or  expounded  without  judging  of  them 
and  pronouncing  on  them.  And  it  is  passing 
strange  if  the  Church  should  be  incompetent  to 
judge  of  these  things,  and  the  scientific  historians 
alone  competent ;  that  is,  if  the  Church  should  be 
fallible  in  dogmatic  facts,  and  the  scientific  histor- 
ians infaUible.  What  is  this  but  Lutheranism  in  his- 
tory ?  In  those  that  are  without,  this  is  consist^^nt : 
in  Cathohcs,  it  would  not  only  be  inconsistent  but  a 
heresy. 

The  Council  of  the  Vatican  has  with  great  pre- 
cision condemned  this  error  in  these  words : 
"  Catholics  can  have  no  just  cause  of  calling  into 


»,,_,. 


SCIENTIFIC  HISTORY,   ETC. 


137 


doubt  the  faith  they  have  received  from  the  teach- 
ing authority  (magisterium)  of  the  Church,  and  of 
suspending  their  assent,  until  they  shall  have  com- 
pleted a  scientific  demonstration  of  the  truth  of 
their  faith.* 

Again,  the  Council  lays  down,  in  respect  to  sci- 
ences properly  so  called,  a  principle  which  a  for- 
tiori applies  to  "  historical  science,"  with  signal 
impropriety  so  called,  by  declaring  "that  every 
assertion  contrary  to  the  truth  of  enlightened 
faith  is  false  .  .  .  Wherefore  all  faithful  Christians 
are  not  only  forbidden  to  defend  as  legitimate  con- 
clusions of  science  all  such  opinions  as  are  known 
to  be  contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  faith,  especially 
if  they  have  been  condemned  by  the  Church,  but 
are  altogether  bound  to  hold  them  to  be  er- 
rors, which  put  on  the  fallacious  appearance  of 
truth."* 

I  have  said  that  the  treatment  of  history  can  only 
be  called  science  with  signal  impropriety ;  and  for 
the  following  reasons : 

According  to  both  philosophers  and  theologians, 
science  is  the  habit  of  the  mind  conversant  with 
necessary  truth  ;  that  is,  truth  which  admits  of 
demonstration,  and  of  the  certainty  which  excludes 
the  possibility  of  its  contradictory  being  true. 

According  to  the  scholastic  philosophy,  science 
is  defined  as  follows : 

Viewed  subjectively^  it  is  "  the  certain  and  evident 
knowledge  of  the  ultimate  reasons  or  principles  of 
truth  attained  by  reasoning." 

Viewed  objectively^  it  is  "  the  system  of  known 


*  Constitutio  De  Fido  Catliolica,    Appendix,  p.  200. 


i\ 


138 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


truths  belonging  to  the  same  order  as  a  whole,  and 
depending  only  upon  one  principle." 

This  is  founded  on  the  definitions  of  Aristotle, 
In  the  sixth  book  of  the  Ethics,  chapter  iii.  he  says : 
"  From  this  it  is  evident  what  science  is  :  to  speak 
accurately,  and  not  to  follow  mere  similitudes  ;  for 
we  all  understand  that  what  we  know  cannot  be 
otherwise  than  we  know  it.  For  whatsoever  may 
or  may  not  be,  as  a  practical  question,  is  not  known 
to  be,  or  not  to  be." 

Such  also  is  the  definition  of  St.  Thomas.  He 
says :  "  Whatsoever  truths  are  truly  known  as  by 
certain  knowledge  (ut  certa  scientia)  are  known 
b)^  resolution  into  theii^  first  principles,  which  of 
themselves  are  immediately  present  to  the  intellect 
...  So  that  it  is  impossible  that  the  same  thing 
should  be  the  object  both  of  faith  and  of  science, 
that  is,  because  of  the  obscurity  of  the  principles  of 
faith."  He  nevertheless  calls  theology  a  science. 
But  Vasquez  shows  from  Cajetan  that  this  is  to  be 
understood  not  simply  but  relatively,  nofi  simpliciier^ 
scd  secundum  quid.  The  Thomists  generally  hold 
theology  to  be  a  science  ;  but  imperfect  in  its  kind. 
Gregory  of  Valentia  sums  up  the  opinions  of  the 
Schools,  and  concludes  as  follows :  "  That  theology 
is  not  science  is  taught  by  Durandus,  Ocham, 
Gabriel,  and  others,  whose  opinions  I  hold  to  be 
the  truest."  He  adds  :  "  Though  it  be  not  a  pro- 
per science,  it  is  a  habit  absolutely  more  perfect 
than  any  science  ;"  and  again :  "  Yet,  nevertheless, 
by  the  best  of  rights,  it  may  be  called  a  science 
because  absolutely  it  is  a  habit  more  perfect  than 
any  science  described  by  philosophers."* 


*  Temporal  Mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  p.  107-113. 


SCIENTIFIC  HISTORY,   ETC. 


139 


Theology  then  may  be  called,  though  improprie, 
a,  science.  First,  because  it  is  a  science,  if  not  as 
to  its  principles,  at  least  as  to  its  form,  method, 
process,  development,  and  transmission.  And  sec- 
ondly, because  though  its  principles  are  not  evident, 
they  are,  in  all  the  higher  regions  of  it,  infallibly 
certain ;  and  because  many  of  them  are  the  neces- 
sary, eternal,  and  incorruptible  truths,  which  ac- 
cording to  Aristotle,  generate  science. 

If  then  theology,  which  in  certainty  is  next  to 
science,  properly  so  called,  is  to  be  called  science 
only  improprie,  notwithstanding  the  infallible  cer- 
tainty and  immutable  nature  of  its  ultimate  princi- 
ples, how  can  human  history,  written  by  uninspir- 
ed human  authors,  transmitted  by  documents  open 
to  corruption,  change,  and  mutilation,  without 
custody  or  security,  except  the  casual  tradition  of 
human  testimony  and  human  criticism,  open  to 
perversion  by  infirmity  and  passion  of  every  kind, 
— how  can  such  subject-matter  yield  principles  of 
certainty  which  excludes  contradiction,  and  ulti- 
mate truths  immediate  to  the  intellect  and  evident 
in  themselves? 

If  by  historical  science  be  meant  an  increased 
precision  in  examining  evidence  and  in  testing 
documents,  and  in  comparing  narratives  together, 
we  will  gladly  use  the  word  by  courtesy ;  but  if 
more  than  this  be  meant,  if  a  claim  be  set  up  for 
history,  which  is  not  admitted  even  for  theology, 
then  in  the  name  of  truth,  both  Divine  and  human, 
let  the  pretence  be  exposed.  And  yet  for  many 
years  these  pretensions  have  been  steadily  advanc- 
ing. Many  people  have  been  partly  deceived,  and 
partly  intimidated   by  them.     The  confident  and 


I 


!   ! 


I 


f 


•ij  if 


140 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


compassionate  tone  in  which  certain  writers  have 
treated  all  who  differ  from  them,  has  won  the  re- 
ward which  often  follows  upon  any  signal  audacity. 
But  when  Catholics  once  understand  that  this 
school  among  us  elevates  the  certainty  of  history 
above  the  certainty  of  faith,  and  appeals  from  the 
traditional  doctrine  of  the  Church  to  its  own  his- 
torical science,  their  instincts  will  recoil  from  it  as 
irreconcilable  with  faith. 

There  is  something  happily  inimitable  in  the 
conceit  of  the  words  with  which  Janus  opens  his 
preface : 

"  The  immediate  object  of  this  work  is  to  investi- 
gate by  the  /ig/il  of  history  those  questions  which 
we  are  credibly  informed  are  to  be  decided  at  the 
QHcumenical  Council  already  announced.  And  as 
we  have  endeavored  to  fulfil  this  task  by  direct 
reference  to  original  anthoritieSj  it  is  not,  perhaps, 
too  much  to  hope  that  our  labors  will  attract  atten- 
tion in  scientific  circles  ;  and  serve  as  a  contribi'.tion 
to  ecclesiastical  history." 

Janus  goes  on  to  say,  "  But  this  work  aims  also 
at  something  more  than  the  mere  calm  and  aimless 
exhibition  of  historical  events :  the  reader  will 
readily  perceive  that  it  has  a  far  wider  scope,  and 
deals  with  ecclesiastical  politics ;  and  in  one  word, 
that  it  is  a  pleading  for  very  life,  an  appeal  to  the 
thinkers  among  believing  Christians,"  &c.* 

We  have  here  an  unconscious  confession.  "  Ja- 
nus"  strictly  is  an  appeal  from  the  light  of  faith  to 
the  light  of  liistory,  that  is,  from  the  supernatural 


*  Tim  Pope  and  the  Council,  l^y  Janus.    Preface,  p.  xui,    London,  f 

18G9.  ' 


SCIENTIFIC   HISTORY,   ETC. 


141 


to  the  natural  order ;  a  process,  as  I  have  said  again 
and  again,  consistent  in  Protestants  and  Rational- 
ists :  in  Catholics,  simply  heretical. 

The  direct  reference  to  original  authorities  is,  of 
course,  a  prerogative  of  Janus.  Who  else  but  he 
ever  could,  or  would,  or  did,  refer  to  the  original 
authorities? 

Again,  it  is  a  work  addressed  to  scientific  circles. 
Lord  Bacon  describes  a  school  of  philosophers  who, 
when  they  come  abroad,  lift  their  hand  in  the  atti- 
tude of  benediction,  "  with  the  look  of  those  who 
pity  men."  Is  science  in  the  Catholic  Church  con- 
fined to  "  circles  ?"  Is  it  an  esoteric  perfection 
which  belongs  to  the  favored  and  to  the  few  who 
assemble  in  chambers  and  secret  places  ?  Our 
Lord  has  warned  us  that  the  science  of  God  has  a 
wider  expanse  of  light.  In  truth,  this  science  is  a 
modern  Gnosticism,  superior  to  the  Church,  con- 
temptuous of  faith,  and  profoundly  egotistical.  It 
appeals  to  thinkers  among  believing  Christians : 
that  is,  to  the  intellectual  few  among  the  herd  of 
mere  believers. 

But  finally  the  truth  escapes:  the  aim  of  the 
book  is  not  merely  calm  and  aimless.  It  deals  with 
ecclesiastical  politics ;  that  is,  it  was  an  organized, 
combined,  and  deliberate  attempt  to  hinder  the 
Vatican  Council  in  its  liberty  of  action,  and  in  the 
same  breath,  before  the  Council  had  assembled,  to 
deny  its  (Ecumenicity  on  the  ground  that  it  would 
not  be  free. 

The  book  concludes  as  follows : 

"  That  is  quite  enough — it  means  this,  that  what- 
soever course  the  Synod  may  take,  one  quality  can 
never  be  predicated  of  it,  namely,  that  it  has  been 


142 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


a  really  free  CounciV.  Theologians  and  canonists 
declare  that  without  complete  freedom,  the  de- 
cisions of  the  Council  are  not  binding,  and  the 
assembly  is  only  a  pseudo-synod."* 

This  was  written  in  Germany  during  the  sum- 
mer of  last  year.  The  English  translation  was 
published  by  a  Protestant  bookseller  in  London  in 
the  month  of  November.  I  bought  the  Italian 
translation  in  the  same  month  in  Florence,  on  my 
way  to  the  opening  of  the  Council.  French  and 
Spanish  bishops  told  me,  on  arriving,  that  they 
had  translations  in  their  own  language.  And  in 
Spain  and  Italy  copies  were  sent  to  the  bishops 
through  the  channels  of  those  Governments. 

We  have  here  the  latest  example  of  passionless 
science. 

Oi  the  literary  merits  of  the  book,  I  will  only  say 
first,  that  for  its  accuracy  a  fair  account  has  been 
taken  in  a  pamphlet  entitled  "  A  few  Specimens  of 
Scientific  History  from  Janus;"  and  for  profound- 
ness that  it  is  simply  shallow,  con.^.ared  with  Jew- 
ell's "  Defence  of  the  Apology,"  Barrow  "  On  the 
Pope's  Supremacy,"  Crackenthorp's  "  Vigilius 
Dormitans,"  Bramhall's  "  Schism  Guarded,"  Thorn- 
dike's  "  Epilogue,"  Brown's  "  Fasciculus  Rerum," 
&c.,  to  say  nothing  of  the  Magdeburg  Centuriators, 
or  even  Mosheim's  or  Gieseler's  Histories. 

The  old  Protestant  and  especially  the  Anglican 
anticatholic  writers  are  solid,  learned,  and  ponder- 
ous, compared  with  Janus.  They  have  also  the 
force  of  visible  sincerity.  Used  against  the  Church 
from  without,  their  arguments  are  consistent  and 


*  Ibid.  p.  425. 


SCIENTIFIC   HISTORY,   ETC. 


143 


weighty ;  used  by  professing  Catholics  within  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  they  are  powerless  in  contro- 
versy, and  heretical  in  their  effects  and  conse- 
quences. 

I  speak  thus  plainly.  Reverend  and  dear  Breth- 
ren, because  you  are  charged  with  the  cure  of 
souls ;  and  in  this  country,  where  reading,  speak- 
ing, writing  has  no  rule  or  limit,  those  committed 
to  your  charge  will  be  in  daily  temptation.  They 
cannot  close  their  eyes ;  and  if  they  could,  they 
cannot  close  their  ears.  What  they  refuse  to  read 
they  cannot  fail  to  hear.  It  is  the  trial  permitted 
for  the  purity  and  confirmation  of  their  faith.  By 
your  vigilant  care  they  will  be  what  the  Catholics 
of  England,  in  the  judgment  often  expressed  to  me 
in  other  countries,  already  are — and  I  would  we 
were  so  in  the  degree  in  which  others  believe — 
that  is,  firm,  fearless,  intelligent  in  faith,  and  not 
ashamed  to  confess  it  before  men.  Nevertheless 
the  trial  is  severe  for  many.  And,  as  I  have  said 
before,  the  Council  will  be  *'  'a  ruinam  et  in  resur- 
rectionem  multoretni."  Some  who  think  them- 
selves to  stand  will  fall;  and  some,  of  whom  we 
perhaps  have  no  hope,  will  rise  to  fill  their  place. 
Therefore  we  must  be  faithful  and  fearless  for  the 
truth. 

The  book  "  Janus  "  warns  us  of  two  duties.  The 
one,  to  watch  against  this  Gnostic  inflation  of 
scientific  conceit  which  is  the  animus  of  heresy  ; 
the  other,  to  warn  all  Catholics  that  to  deny  the 
CEcumenicity  or  the  freedom  of  the  Council  which 
the  Vicar  of  Christ  has  already  confirmed  in  all  its 
acts  hitherto  complete,  or  the  obligation  imposed 
upon   the   faithful   by  those   acts,  is   implicitly  to 


11 


144 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


deny  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church :  and  that  to 
doubt,  or  to  propagate  doubts,  of  its  CEcumenicity 
and  freedom,  or  of  the  obligations  of  its  acts,  is  at 
least  the  first  step  to  that  denial. 


i 


CHAPTER  V. 

CONCLUSION. — TRADITION  OF  E^  GLAND. — GREATER 
UNITY  OF  FAITH  RESULTING  FROM  THE  DEFINI- 
TION. • 


In  an  CEcumenical  Council,  Bishops  are  witnesses 
of  the  Faith  of  their  respective  Churches.  Not  in- 
deed as  if  they  were  representatives  or  delegates  of 
their  flocks  ;  a  theory  strangely  advanced  by  some 
writers  who  counted  up  the  population  of  what 
they  were  pleased  to  call  the  greater  cities,  in  or- 
der to  give  weight  to  the  testimony  of  their  Bish- 
ops as  against  that  of  others.  In  this  they  simply 
betrayed  the  fact  that  they  were  resting  upon  the 
natural  order,  and  arguing,  not  on  principles  of 
faith,  but  of  the  political  world. 

Bishops  are  witnesses,  primarily  and  chiefly,  not 
of  the  subjective  faith  of  their  flocks,  which  may 
vary  or  be  obscured,  but  of  the  objective  faith  of 
the  Church  committed  to  their  trust,  when  by 
consecration  they  became  witnesses,  doctors,  and 
judges.  They  were  by  consecration  admitted  to 
the  Ecclesia  docens,  and  the  Divine  Tradition  of 
1»he  Faith  was  entrusted  to  their  custody.  But 
this  is  one  and  the  same  in  the  humblest  Vicar 
Apostolic,  and  in  the  Bishop  of  the  most  populous 
and  imperial  city  in  Christendom. 

7  (145) 


n 


r . 


146 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


In  the  coarse  of  the  discussions,  testimony  was 
given  to  the  unbroken  tradition  of  the  doctrine  of 
Papal  InfalHbility  in  Italy,  Spain,  Ireland,  and 
many  other  countries.  It  will  not  therefore  bd 
without  its  use  and  interest,  if  I  add  briefly  a  few 
evidences  of  the  unbroken  tradition  of  England  as 
to  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  It  would 
be  out  of  place  in  this  Pastoral  to  do  more  than 
offer  to  you  a  few  passages ;  but  I  would  wish  to 
stir  up  some  one  who  has  time  for  such  research, 
to  collect  and  publish  a  complete  catena  of  evidence 
from  the  writers  before  and  since  the  Reformation ; 
which  will  show  that  the  Gallicanism,  or  worse 
than  Gallicanism,  of  Cisalpine  Clubs  and  Political 
Emancipationists  was  no  more  than  the  momentary 
aberration  of  a  few  minds  under  the  stress  of  penal 
laws.  They  are  abnormal  instances  in  the  noble 
fidelity  of  the  Catholics  of  England. 

As  to  the  Bishops  and  Doctors  of  the  English 
Church  before  the  Reformation,  I  may  first  remind 
you  of  the  words  of  St.  Anselm,  St.  Thomas  of 
Canterbury,  and  Bradwardine,  three  primates  of 
England,  given  in  the  Pastoral  of  last  year.  To 
these  may  be  added  St.  ^Ired  of  Rivails:,*  John 
of  SaHsbury,f  Robert  PuUen,:]:  Thomas  of  Eves- 
ham,§  Robert  Grostcte,!  Roger  Bacon,^  Scotus,** 

*  Blbl.  Max.  ratram,  torn,  xxiii.  pp.  57,  58.    Ed.  Lugd.  1677. 

f  Polyciates,  lib.  vi.  c.  24,  p.  61.    Ed.  Giles. 

X  In  Sentent.  b.  viii.  c.  iii. 

§  In  Vita  Sti.  Egwini,  sect.  vi. 

I  Epp.  73  and  127. 

^  OpiiB.  c.  xiv. 

**  In  Sent.  iv.  diet.  vl.  0,  8 


CONCLUSION. 


H7 


Bachon  *  Holcot,t  Richard  Ralph,:}:  and  Walden- 
sis.§  Tn  these  writers  the  Primacy  of  the  Pon- 
tiff, and  the  obligation,  under  pain  of  sin,  to  obey 
his  judgments  and  doctrines,  is  laid  down  with  a 
perfect  unconsciousness  that  any  Catholic  could 
dispute  the  Divine  certainty  of  his  guidance.  The 
Vatican  definition  has  defined  the  reason  of  this 
implicit  faith,  by  declaring  that  in  the  primacy 
there  is  a  charisma  which  preserves  the  supreme 
doctrinal  authority  of  the  Pontiff  from  error  in  faith 
or  morals. 

But  I  leave  to  others  to  complete  this  part  of  the 
subject.  I  will  go  on  to  the  period  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. 

The  controversy  against  the  authority  of  Rome 
drew  out  more  explicit  statements  from  Sir  Thom- 
as More  and  Cardinal  Fisher. 

More,  writing  against  Luther,  says,  "Judge,  I 
pray  thee,  reader,  with  what  sincerity  Father  Tip- 
pler treats  this  place  of  Jerome,  when  he  (Jerome) 
says  it  is  eno\igh  for  him  if  the  Pope  of  Rome  ap- 
prove his  faith ;  that  is,  openly  declaring  that  it 
cannot  be  doubted  that  he  is  sound  in  faith  who 
agrees  with  that  See ;  than  which  what  could  he 
more  splendidly  say  ?  Yet  Father  Tippler,  Luther 
and  others  so  dissemble  about  this  as  to  try  to 
cloud  the  reader  also  with  darkness,  and  to  lead 
away  the  minds  of  men  elsewhere,  that  they  may 
not  remember  anything."  || 


*  Prolopf.  in  Lib.  iv.  Sentcnt. 

\  In  Li  I),  iv.  Sentont. 

%  Smnina  in  (lUfrstionibus  Armenorum,  lib.  vii.  c.  5. 

§  Doctrina  Fidel,  lib.  ii.  cnpp.  47,  48. 

H  "  QuflDSo  loctor  judioa  quani  sincere  pater  Potator  liunc  locum 


148 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


Cardinal  Fisher  also,  writing  against  Luther, 
says :  "  One  thing  I  know,  that  Augustine  every- 
where makes  Peter  first  and  Prince  of  the  Apostles, 
and  Teacher  and  Head  of  the  rest,  in  whom  also  he 
says  the  rest  are  contained,  as  in  the  head  of  any 
family  the  multitude  (of  the  family)  are  all  contain- 
ed." *  And  further  he  adds,  "  Where  else  dost 
thou  believe  the  faith  to  abide,  save  in  the  Church 
of  Christ?  '  I,'  said  Christ  to  Peter,  *  have  prayed 
for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not.'  The  faith  of  Peter, 
do  not  doubt  it,  will  always  abide  in  the  succession 
of  Peter,  which  is  the  Church."  f  This  is  precisely 
the  Vatican  definition,  "  Romanum  Pontificem  ea 
infallibilitate  pollere,  qua  divinus  Redemptor  Ec- 
clesiam  suam  instructam  esse  voluit." 

Cardinal  Pole,  after  describing  the  conduct  of 
Peter  in  the  Council  at  Jerusalem,  goes  on  to  say, 
"  The  same  also  the  successors  of  Peter,  following 
his  faith,  have  done  in  all  other  Councils ;  in  which 

Hieronymi  tractet :  cum  ille  dicat,  satis  esse  sibi  si  suam  fidcm  cora- 
probaret  papa  Roraanus  :  nimirum  aporte  sipnificans,  iion  dubitan- 
dum  C880  ilium  recte  sentire  do  fide,  qui  cum  ilia  sedo  consentiat : 
quo  quid  potuisset  dicere  magnificentius  ?  istud  adeo  dissimulat 
pater  I'otator  Lutherus  ut  etiam  teuebras  lectori  conetur  oftundero 
et  animos  hominum  verbis  alio,  no  quid  recordentur,  abducero." — 
Morus,  In,  Luthenim,  lib.  ii.  cap.  iv.  p.  87.    Louvain,  15GG. 

*  "  Unum  Bcio,  quod  Auguatinus  ubiquo  IVtrum  I'acit  Primum  ct 
Principera  Apostolorum  ac  Magistrum  ct  Caput  cieterorum,  in  quo 
et  cajteros  contineri  dicit,  sicut  in  capito  oujusvis  familiro  reruiua 
comprelionditur  multitudo." — Joannis  RofFonsis  Confatatio  Error- 
um  Lutheri,  art.  xxv.  ad  finem,  in  liocaborti  lliblioth.  Ponlif.  tom. 
xiv.  p.  583. 

f  "  Ubi  crodis  alibi  mancro  fidem  quam  in  Eccloelu  Christi  ?  Ego, 
inquit  Christus  ad  Tetrum,  rogavi  pro  to  ut  non  defioiat  lides  tun. 
Petri  fides  no  dubita  semper  in  successione  Petri  manebit,  quir  est 
Ecclesia." — Id.  art.  xxvii.  ad  fin.  in  Uocaborto,  tom.  xiv.  p.  C87. 


CONCLUSION. 


149 


in  quo 


is  found  much  more  signally  than  in  Peter's  life- 
time, of  what  kind  are  the  efforts  of  Satan,  who  de- 
sires to  shift  the  Church  of  God,  and  how  great  is 
the  efficacy  of  this  special  remedy  in  repressing 
them ;  namely,  that  which  Christ  declared  when 
he  turned  to  Peter,  in  these  words,  'And  thou, 
being  once  converted,  strengthen  thy  brethren.* 
For  let  all  remedies  be  found  which  at  any  time 
the  Church  has  tried  against  the  malice  of  Satan, 
who  at  all  times  assails  it  with  all  kinds  of  tempta- 
tions ;  none  certainly  will  be  ever  found  to  be  com- 
pared with  this,  which  is  wont  to  be  used  in  Gen- 
eral Councils ;  namely,  that  all  the  Bishops  of  all 
the  Churches,  as  the  brethren  of  Peter,  be  con- 
firmed by  his  successors,  professors  of  the  same 
faith."  * 

In  like  manner,  Harding,  Jewel's  antagonist, 
writes :  "  The  Pope  succeedeth  Peter  in  authority 
and  power.  For  whereas  the  sheep  of  Christ  con- 
tinue to  the  world's  end,  he  is  not  wise  that  think- 
eth  Christ  to  have  made  a  shepherd  temporary  or 
for  a  time  over  His  perpetual  flock.     To  Peter  He 

*  "  Idem  etiara  Petri  successores,  fidem  ejus  secuti,  fecere  in  reli- 
quis  omnibus  couciliis,  in  quibus  multo  illuBirius  quam  vivo  Petro 
compertum  est,  et  cujusmodi  esset  Satana;  conatus  Ecclesiam  Dei 
cribraro  cxpctentis,  et  quanta  ad  eos  repriiuendos  oxtitcrit  vis  hujus 
sinffularis  remodii,  quod  Cliristus  ad  Petrum  sermonem  convertens 
verbis  illis  indicavit :  Et  tu  aliquando  couversus  confirma  fratres 
tuoB.  Ut  enim  omnia  remcdla  qua^rantur  qua)  ullo  tempore  Ecclesia 
est  experta  contra  Satana?  malitiam  iiunquam  non  omni  tontationls 
penoro  earn  ajjpredientis :  nullum  certo  reperietur  quod  cum  line 
comparnri  possit,  quod  in  couciliis  gencralibus  adhiberi  est  solitum, 
ut  singuli  sinjfularum  Ecclesiarum  episcopi,  tanquam  Petri  fratres, 
confirmarentur  per  ejus  successores  eandem  fidem  profiXentes." — 
Card.  PoluB,  Dc  Siimmo  Fontijlcc,  cap.  iv.  (Rocabcrti,  Biblioth.  Pan- 
Uf.  torn,  xviii.  p.  140.) 


ISO 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


f.       ! 


gave  that  He  obtained  by  His  prayer  made  to  the 
Father,  that  his  faith  should  not  fail.  Again,  to 
him  he  gave  grace  thus  to  perform,  the  performance 
whereof  at  him  He  required,  to  wit,  that  he  con- 
firmed and  strengthened  his  brethren,  wherefore 
the  grace  of  steadfastness  of  faith,  and  of  confirming 
the  wavering  and  doubtful  in  faith,  every  Pope 
obtaineth  of  the  Holy  Ghost  for  the  benefit  of  the 
Church.  And  so  the  Pope,  although  he  may  err 
by  personal  error  in  his  own  private  judgment  as  a 
man,  and  as  a  particular  doctor  in  his  own  opinion, 
yet  as  he  is  Pope,  the  successor  of  Peter,  the  Vicar 
of  Christ  in  earth,  the  shepherd  of  the  Universal 
Church,  in  public  judgment,  in  deliberation  and 
definitive  sentence,  he  never  erreth,  nor  never 
erred.  For  whensoever  he  ordaineth  or  determin- 
eth  anything  by  his  high  bishoply  authority,  in- 
tending to  bind  Christian  men  to  perform  or  be- 
lieve the  same,  he  is  always  governed  and  holpen 
with  the  grace  and  favor  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This 
is  to  Catholic  doctors  a  very  certainty,  though  to 
such  doughty  clerks  as  ye  are  it  is  but  a  matter  of 
nothing  and  a  very  trifling  talc."* 

Campian,  answering  Whitaker,  says,  "  Nor,  as 
you  slander  us,  do  we  depend  on  the  voice  of  one 
man,  but  rather  on  the  Divine  promise  of  Christ 
made  to  Peter  and  his  successors,  for  the  stability 
of  whose  faith  He  prayed  to  the  Father.  .  .  . 
*  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  Peter/  He  said,  '  that  thy 
faith  fail  not.'  The  fruit  of  which  prayer,  what  fol- 
lows plainly  enough  shows,  belongs  not  to  Peter 

*  Confutiition  of  a  Book  entitled  "  An  Apology  of  tho  Church  of 
EuKhind,"  by  ThomuB  Harding,  D.  D.,  page  i3J5  a.  Dedicated  to 
the  Queen.    Antwerp,  1505. 


CONCLUSION. 


151 


alone,  but  to  his  successors  also.  .  .  .  For  since 
the  Church  was  not  to  become  extinct  with  Peter, 
but  to  endure  unto  the  end  of  the  world,  the  same 
stability  in  faith  was  even  more  necessary  to  Peter's 
successors,  the  Roman  Pontiffs,  in  proportion  as 
they  were  weaker  than  he,  and  were  to  be  assailed 
with  mightier  engines  by  tyrants,  heretics,  and 
other  impious  men.  As,  therefore,  Peter  when 
converted,  confirmed  the  Apostles  his  brethren, 
the  Pontiffs  also  must  confirm  their  brethren  the 
rest  of  the  Bishops."  Afterwards,  he  says,  "  Under 
his  guidance  they  cannot  err  from  the  right  path 
of  the  faith."* 

These  evidences  are  more  than  enough  to  show 
what  was  the  faith  of  the  Church  in  England  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  that  is,  in  the  controversies  of 
the  Reformation.  They  show  what  was  the  faith, 
for  which  the  Catholics  of  England  at  that  day 
stood,  and  suffered. 

In  the  seventeenth  century,  we  may  take  Nicholas 
Sanders  as  our  first  witness.  He  writes  in  his  work 
"  Dc  Clavi  David"  :  "  But  we  freely  declare,  and 
what  in  words  we  declare  we  prove  by  fact,  that 
the  successor  of  Peter,  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  in  ex- 
pounding to  the  Bishops  the  faith  of  Christ,  has 
never  erred,  nor  has  either  been  the  author  of  any 
heresy,  or  has  lent  his  authority  to  any  heretic  for 
the  promulgation  of  heresy. "f 

""     — ~~" ""■ ■ — ' — ' ^..— — — ^— ^_ —    ■'--•'         ■ " I '  ■■- I  I—  I     -—  ■  4 

*  Confutatio  Responsionla  G.  Wliitakeri,  p.  44.    ParisUs  1582. 

f  "  At  vero  nos  libcro  dicimus,  ct  quod  verbo  dicimus  ro  ipsa 
comprobamup,  Petri  succossorera  Ei  '.scopum  Uomannm  in  expo- 
nonda  Kpiscopis  fide  Cliristi  nuiiquani  errassc,  nunquum  aut  uUius 
liRTcsis  auctnrcm  I'uisse,  aut  alii  luvrctico  ad  promulgandum  hte- 
resim  suum  prasbuisse  auctoritatem."— Nicolas  Sanderus,  de  Clavi 
David,  lib.  v.  cap.  iv. 


152 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


i 

;   I 
i   I 


Kellison,  President  of  the  College  at  Douai  in 
1605,  writes  as  follows:  "  For  in  two  senses  Peter 
may  be  sayd  to  be  the  rocke  of  the  Church :  first, 
as  he  is  a  particular  man,  and  so  if  the  Church  had 
been  built  upon  him,  it  must  have  fallen  with  him ; 
secondly,  as  upon  a  publique  person  and  supreme 
Pastor,  who  is  to  have  successors,  to  whom  con- 
stancie  in  faith  is  promised,  by  which  they  shal  up- 
hold the  Church :  and  so  the  Church  dyeth  not 
with  Peter,  but  keepeth  her  standing  upon  suc- 
cessors. And  because  Peter  and  his  successors,  by 
their  indeficient  faith,  in  which  as  supreme  pastors 
they  shal  never  erre,  do  uphold  the  Church,  there- 
fore the  Fathers  alleaged  sometimes  say  that  the 
Church  is  builded  on  Peter,  sometimes  on  his  faith, 
as  it  is  the  faith  of  the  supreme  head  :  which  in  ef- 
fect is  al  one.  For  if  Peter  upholde  the  Church  by 
his  indeficient  faith  which  he  teacheth,  then  Peter 
upholdeth  the  Church,  as  he  hath  assured  faith,  and 
his  faith  upholdeth  the  Church,  not  howsoever  but 
as  it  is  the  faith  of  Peter,  and  the  supreme  head, 
whose  faith  especially  which  he  teacheth  out  of  his 
chaire  (that  is,  not  as  a  particular  man  only,  pro- 
posing his  opinion ;  but  as  a  publique  Doctor  and 
chiefe  Pastor)  defineth  and  commandeth  what  al 
Christians  ought  to  beleeve,  shal  never  faile ;  and 
consequently  the  Church  which  relyeth  on  his  defi- 
nition, though  she  may  be  shaken,  )'^et  shal  never 
be  overthrowne."* 

In  a  work  published  by  S.  N.,  Doctor  of  Divinity, 
1634,  we  read :  "  The  same  is  proved  by  all  such 
texts  as  convince  that  the  head  or  chief  Bishop  of 

*  A  Survey  of  the  New  Religion,  set  forth  by  Matthew  Kellison, 
iiret  book,  chap.  vi.  p.  74.    Doway,  1605. 


CONCLUSION. 


153 


con- 
il  up- 
not 


the  Church  cannot  err  in  defining  matters  of  faith. 
'Simon,  Simon,  Satan  hath  desired  you  that  he 
might  winnow  you  as  wheat,  but  I  have  prayed  for 
thee  that  thy  faith  may  not  fail.'  Here  Christ 
prayed  not  for  all  the  Church,  but  in  particular  for 
Peter,  as  all  the  words  show  :  Simon — for  thee — thy 
faith — thy  brethren  :  also,  whereas  our  Saviour  be- 
gan to  speak  in  the  plural  number,  *  Satan  ^ath  de- 
sired to  have  you,'  etc.,  forthwith  He  changeth  His 
manner  of  speaking  and  saith,  *  but  I  have  prayed 
for  thee.'  Further,  He  prayeth  for  him  to  whom 
He  saith,  '  and  thou  sometimes  converted,'  which 
cannot  agree  to  the  whole  Church,  except  we  will 
say -the  whole  Church  to  have  been  first  perverted, 
which  is  many  ways  untrue.  But  now  that  which 
Christ  prayed  for  is  expressly  that  his  faith  should 
not  fail,  and  then  seeing  this  prayer  for  Peter  was 
for  the  good  of  the  Church,  the  Devil  still  desiring 
to  winnow  the  faithful,  it  thereof  followeth  that  she 
never  wanteth  one  whose  faith  may  not  fail,  by 
whom  she  may  be  confirmed."* 

Southwell,  or  Bacon,  who  wrote  in  1638,  affirms : 
"  That  the  Roman  Pontiff,  out  of  Council,  is  infal- 
lible in  his  definitions."  He  adds :  "  It  is  clearly 
proved  from  what  is  already  said,  he  who  is  the 
foundation-stone  of  the  Church,  actually  and  al- 
ways infusing  into  it  firmness  against  the  gates  of 
hell  and  heresies :  he  who  is  Pastor  not  of  this  or 
that  place,  but  of  the  whole  fold :  and  therefore  in 
all  things  necessary  to  salvation  is  bound  to  feed, 
govern,  and  direct,  cannot  err  in  judgment  of  faith. 

.     .     But  the  Supreme  Pontiff  is  such  a  Rock  and 


*  The  Triple  Cord.  p.  72.    1084. 


i 

I 

il 


I 


154 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


H 


Pastor,  as  has  been  manifestly  proved;  therefore 
he  cannot  err  in  judgment  of  faith."  This  he  proves, 
among  other  evidence,  by  the  promise  of  our  Lord : 
"  I  have  prayed  for  thee,"  etc.,  and  adds,  "  What 
was  said  i.o  Peter  as  pastor  was  said  also  to  the 
Roman  Pontiffs,  as  has  been  abundantly  proved."* 
Nor  was  this  tradition  broken,  though  the  de- 
pression which  followed  the  Revohition  of  1688 
reduced  the  Catholics  to  silence.  In  the  eighteenth 
century,  the  following  testimonies  will  suffice.  More 
might,  no  doubt,  with  ease  be  found  ;  buc  for  our 
present  purpose  no  more  are  needed.  First,  of 
Alban  Butler,  who  assuredly  represents  the  Eng- 
lish Catholics  of  his  times,  we  read  as  follows  :  "  It 
is  evident  from  \i\^  Epitome  de  sex  prioribiis  conciliis 
cecumenicis  in  cake  tractatiis  de  Incur natio7ie,  that  he 
had  the  highest  veneration  for  the  Holy  See,  and 
for  him  who  sits  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter  ;  that  he 
constantly  held  and  maintained  the  rights  and  sin- 
gular prerogatives  of  St.  Peter  and  his  successors 
in  calling,  presiding  over,  and  confirming,  general 
or  oecumenical  councils;  the  Pope's  superiority 
over  the  whole  church  and  over  the  whole  college 
of  bishops,  and  over  a  general  council ;  the  irrc- 
formability  of  his  doctrinal  decisions  in  point  of  faith 
and  morals  ;  his  supreme  power  to  dispense  (when 
there  is  cause)  in  the  canons  of  general  councils; 
in  short,  the  plenitude  of  his  authority  over  the 
whole  Church  without  exception  or  limitation. 
Nihil  excipiiiir  ubi  distinguitur  nihil.  S.  Bernard, 
I.   ii.   de  Consid.  c.  8."t     What  gives  additional 

*  Regula  viva,  sou  Analysis  Fidei,  p.  41.     Antwerpia?,  1030. 
f  An  Account,  of  the  Life  and  Writings  ol'  the  Rev.  Alban  Butler, 
p.  16.    London,  1799. 


CONCLUSION. 


155 


fore 
ves, 
)rd: 
hat 
the 


force  to  this  is,  that  Alban  Butler  not  only  held 
but  taught  these  doctrines  in  his  theological  treat- 
ises :  and  that  we  receive  this  testimony  from  the 
pen  of  Charles  Butler,  who  of  all  men  is  least  to  be 
suspected  of  ultramontanism. 

In  the  year  1790,  when  a  certain  number  of 
Catholics,  we?.ry  of  penal  laws,  fascinated  by  Parli- 
ment,  and  perhaps  intimidated  by  the  Protestant 
ascendancy,  began  to  explain  away  Catholic  doc- 
trines, and  to  describe  themselves  by  a  nomencla- 
ture which  I  will  not  here  repeat,  the  Rev.  Charles 
Plowden  published  a  work,  the  very  title  of  which 
is  a  witness  and  an  argument.  It  is  called  "  Consid- 
erations on  the  Modern  Opinion  of  the  Fallibility  of 
the  Holy  See  in  the  Decision  of  Dogmatical  Ques- 
tions." He  opeuij  his  first  chapter  with  these  words : 
"  Before  the  Declaration  of  the  Galilean  Clergy  in 
1682,  it  was  the  general  persuasion  ■'>f  Roman  Cath- 
olics that  the  solemn  decisions  of  the  Holy  See  on 
matters  of  dogmatical  and  moral  import  are  infalli- 
ble. Since  that  epoch  the  contrary  opirJon  is  as- 
serted in  many  schools  in  France,  it  has  been  im- 
ported with  other  French  rarities  into  this  kingdom, 
and  it  now  appears  to  be  the  prevailing  system, 
especially  among  those  members  of  our  Catholic 
clergy  and  laity  who  have  studied  little  of  either." 
He  then  most  solidly  proves  what  in  these  Pastorals 
has  been  so  often  asserted,  that,  with  the  exception 
of  the  modern  opinion  of  the  local  and  transient 
Galilean  School,  the  universal  and  traditionary  faitii 
of  the  Church  in  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pon- 
tiff has  never  been  obscured.  Plowden  ihen  pro- 
ceeds to  c  nsure  the  oath  which  certain  Catholics 


156 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


: 


)  ■ 


to  themselves  and 


were  at  that  time  proposmg 
others.     He  says : — 

"  The  clause  which  regards  Papal  Infallibility  is  a 
demonstration  that  the  oath  was  not  calculated  to 
i  ccommodate  the  bulk  of  Roman  Catholics,  since 
the  very  respectable  number  who  believe  the  sol- 
emn and  canonical  decrees  of  the  Pope  on  matters 
of  faith  to  be  irreformable  can  never  conscien- 
tiously pronounce  iL  If  the  interpreters  of  the 
oath  tell  us  that  the  framers  of  it  did  not  intend  to 
exclude  the  belief  of  infallibility  in  dogmatical  de- 
cisions, we  must  answer  them  that  the  admission  of 
such  a  tacit  distinction  would  justly  lay  us  open  to 
swearing  to  what  we  do  not  believe.  No  infallibil- 
bility  and  some  infallibility  will  always  be  contra- 
dictories. The  Catholic  public  may  already  know 
that  I  think  the  modern  opinion  of  papal  fallibility 
in  decisions  of  faith  to  be  ill  grounded  and  danger- 
ous, and  it  appears  to  me  that  the  doctrine  of  infal- 
libility in  these  matters,  though  not  decided,  might 
easily  be  proved  to  be  that  of  the  Catholic  Church 
and  therefore  true.  It  must  not  then  be  renounced. 
The  addition  of  personal  in  the  address  does  not  re- 
move the  difficulty.  For  if  the  Supreme  Head  of 
the  Church  be  infallible  in  his  solemn  dogmatical 
decisions,  this  infallibility  attaches  to  his  person.  It 
was  promised  and  given  to  St.  Peter,  and  it  subsists 
in  his  lawful  successors.  It  does  not  belong  in 
solidum  to  the  particular  Church  of  Rome  as  an  ag- 
gregate of  many  individuals  ;  it  does  not  belong  to 
the  chair  or  see  of  Rome  as  a  thing  distinct  from  the 
Pope.  The  distinction  between  the  sedes  and  the 
sedens  is  a  modern  subterfuge  of  the  Jansenists, 
unknown  to  antiquity,  which  always   understood 


CONCLUSION. 


157 


re- 
of 

;ical 
It 

sists 
ifi 


the  person  of  the  chief  Bishop,  whether  in  words 
they  attribute  inerrancy  directly  to  him  or  meta- 
phorically to  his  see.  If  the  Pope  be  then  infallible, 
he  IS  personally  infallible."* 

I  will  now  add  only  two  more  witnesses  who 
bore  their  testimony  in  the  last  century,  but  lived 
on  into  the  present,  Bishop  Hay,  who  died  in  181 1, 
and  Bishop  Milner,  who  died  in  1826. 

Bishop  Hay,  in  his  "  Sincere  Christian,"  writes  as 
follows : — 

"  Q.  27.  On  what  grounds  do  these  divines  found 
their  opinion,  who  believe  tl^at  the  Pope  himself, 
when  he  speaks  to  all  the  faithful  as  head  of  the 
Church,  is  infaUible  in  what  he  teaches? 

'^  A.  On  several  very  strong  reasons,  both  from 
scripture,  tradition  and  reason." 

He  then  draws  out  these  three  fully  and  abund- 
antly ;  and  this  done,  he  asks  : — 

"  ^.  31.  But  what  proofs  do  the  others  bring  for 
their  opinion  that  the  head  of  the  Church  is  not 
infallible  ? 

^' A.  They  bring  not  one  text  of  Scripture  to 
prove  it,"  &c. 

Lastly,  Bishop  Milner  in  his  book  called  "  Eccle- 
siastical Democracy  detected,"  published  in  1793, 
after  saying  in  the  text,  "  The  controversy  of  the 
Pope's  inerrancy  is  here  entirely  out  of  the  ques- 
tion," adds  the  following  note :  "  It  is  true  I  was 
educated  in  the  belief  of  this  inerrancy ;  nor  have  T 
yet  seen  sufficient  argument  to  change  my  opinion. 
.  .  .  But  if  the  layman,  who  never  fails  to  ridicule 


*  Observations  on  the  Oath  proposed  to  the  English   lloruan 
Ciitholicf?,  by  Charles  Plowden,  p.  43.    London,  1790. 


158 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


ii  '1 


the  doctrine  in  question,  is  willing  fairly  to  contest 
it,  he  knows  where  to  meet  with  an  antagonist  ready 
to  engage  with  him.  Against  one  assertion  how- 
ever of  this  writer,  which  insinuates  the  political 
danger  arising  from  the  doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibil- 
ity, I  will  hurl  defiance  at  him ;  nothing  being  more 
easy  to  show,  than  that  no  greater  danger  can 
result  to  the  State  from  admitting  the  inerrancy  of 
the  Pope  than  from  admitting  that  of  the  Church 
itself."* 

I  only  hope  we  shall  now  hear  no  more  that  the 
Catholics  of  England  have  not  believed,  or  have  not 
been  taught  this  doctrine  ;  nor  that  the  "  Old  Cath- 
olics" of  England  refuse  to  believe  the  new 
opinions,  and  the  like.  We  have  heard  too  much 
of  this:  and  the  honored  name  of  those  who 
through  three  hundred  years  of  persecution  have 
kept  the  faith,  has  been  too  much  dishonored  by 
imputing  to  them  that  they  are  not  faithful  to  the 
Martyrs,  Confessors  and  Doctors  of  England.  The 
faith  of  St.  Anselm  and  St.  Thomas,  of  Thomas 
More  and  Cardinal  Fisher,  of  Hay  and  Milner,  is 
the  faith  of  the  Catholics  of  England.  Whoso  de- 
parts from  it  forfeits  his  share  in  the  inheritance  of 
fidelity  they  have  handed  down. 

1  will  now  add  a  few  words  on  the  disastrous  con- 
sequences predicted  from  the  Definition. 

We  were  told  that  the  Definition  of  the  Infallibil- 
ity  would    alienate   the   fairest   provinces  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  divide  the  Church  into  parties, 
drive  the  scientific  and  independent  into  separation,' 
and  set  the  reason  of  mankind  against  the  supersti- 

*  Ecclesiastical  Democracy  detected,  p.  98.    London,  1793. 


CONCLUSION. 


159 


I 


tions  of  Rome.  We  were  told  of  learned  profes- 
sors, theological  faculties,  entire  universities,  multi- 
tudes of  laity,  hundreds  of  clergy,  the  flower  of  the 
episcopate,  who  were  prepared  to  protest  as  a  body, 
and  to  secede.  There  was  to  be  a  secession  in 
France,  in  Germany,  in  i\ustria,  in  Hungary.  The 
"  Old  Catholics  "  of  England  would  never  hear  of 
this  new  dogma,  and  with  difficulty  could  be  made 
to  hold  their  peace.  Day  by  day,  these  illusions 
have  been  sharply  dispelled  ;  but  not  a  word  of  ac- 
knowledgment is  to  be  heard.  A  professor  is  sus- 
pended a  divinis  in  Germany ;  a  score  or  two  of  lay 
professors,  led  by  a  handful  whose  names  are 
already  notorious,  and  a  hundred  or  so  of  laymen 
who,  before  the  Council  met,  began  to  protest 
against  its  acts,  convoke  a  Congress,  which  ends  in 
a  gathering  of  some  twenty  persons.  These,  with 
the  alleged  opposition  of  one  Bishop,  whose  name 
out  of  respect  I  do  not  write,  as  the  allegation  has 
never  yet  been  confirmed  by  his  own  word  or  act, 
these  are  hitherto  the  adverse  consequences  of  the 
Definition. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Bishops  who,  because 
they  opposed  the  Definition  as  inopportune,  were 
calumniousl}^  paraded  as  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of 
Infallibility,  at  once  began  to  publish  their  submis- 
sion to  the  acts  of  the  Council.  The  greater  part 
of  the  French  Bishops  who  were  once  in  opposi- 
tion, have  explicitly  declared  their  adhesion.  The 
German  Bishops,  meeting  again  at  Fulda,  issued  a 
Pastoral  Letter,  so  valuable  in  itself,  that  I  have  re- 
printed it  in   the   Appendix."     It  was  signed  by 


*  See  Appendix,  p.  247. 


i6o 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


■I  p 


■  » 


4 


I 


i 


i!:i 


seventeen,  including  all  the  Chief  Bishops  of  Ger- 
many. The  others,  if  silent,  cannot  be  doubted. 
The  leading  Bishops  of  Austria  and  Hungary,  who 
may  be  taken  as  representing  the  Episcopates  of 
these  countries,  have  in  like  manner  declared  them- 
selves. The  Clergy  and  the  faithful  of  these  king- 
doms, with  the  rarest  exceptions  of  an  individual 
here  and  there,  are,  as  they  have  always  been,  of 
one  mind  in  accepting  the  deiinition  with  joy.  Ire- 
land has  spoken  for  itself,  not  only  in  many  dioceses, 
and  by  its  Bishops,  but  by  the  Triduum,  or  Thanks- 
giving of  three  days,  held  in  DubMn  with  great  sol- 
emnity and  with  a  concou'"se,  as  I  am  informed  by 
direct  correspondence,  such  as  was  never  seen  be- 
fore. Of  England  I  need  say  Httle.  The  Clergy 
of  this  diocese  have  twice  spoken  for  themselves ; 
and  the  Clergy  of  England  and  Scotland  hr"e  given 
unequivocal  witness  to  their  faith.  As  we  iicar  so 
much  and  so  often  of  those  among  us  who  are  called 
"  the  Old  Catholics,"  that  is,  the  sons  of  our  martyrs 
and  ccnfessors;  and  as  their  name  is  so  lightly  and 
officiously  taken  in  vain  by  those  who  desire  to  find 
or  to  make  divisions  ampng  us,  you  will  not  need, 
but  nevertheless  be  glad,  to  know,  that  both  by 
word  and  by  letter  I  have  received  from  the  chief 
and  foremost  among  them,  express  assurance  that 
what  the  Council  has  defined  they  have  always  be- 
lieved. It  is  but  their  old  faith  in  an  explicit  form- 
ula. Among  the  disappointments  to  which  our  ad- 
versaries, I  regret  so  to  call  them,  but  truth  must 
be  spoken,  have  doomed  themse.  ves,  none  is  greater 
than  this.  They  have  labored  to  behove  and  to 
make  others  believe  that  the  Catholic  Church  is  in- 
ternally divided ;  that  the  Council  has  revealed  this 


CONCLUSION. 


i6i 


of  Ger- 

loubted. 
iry,  who 
Dates  of 
■d  them- 
sC  king- 
dividual 
)een,  of 
y.     Ire- 
ioceses, 
rhanks- 
reat  sol- 
med  by 
een  be- 
Clergy 
n  selves; 
e  given 
iiear  so 
•e  called 
martyrs 
tly  and 
!  to  find 
)t  need, 
)oth  by 
e  chief 
ce  that 
ays  be- 
lt form- 
our  ad- 
h  must 
^^reater 
and  to 
h  is  in- 
ed  this 


division ;  and  that  it  is  nowhere  more  patent  than 
in  England.  It  is,  I  know,  useless  to  contradict  this 
illusion.  It  is  not  founded  in  reason,  and  cannot  by 
reason  be  corrected.  Prejudice  and  passion  are 
deaf  and  blind.  Time  and  facts  will  dispel  illusions, 
and  expose  falsehoods.  And  to  this  slow  but  inex- 
orable cure  we  must  leave  them.  It  is  no  evidence 
of  division  among  us,  if  here  and  there  a  few  indi- 
viduals should  fall  awa3^  I  said  before,  the  Council 
will  be  m  ruinam  et  in  ressurrectionem  mult'orum.  It 
is  a  time  of  spiritual  danger  to  many  ;  especially  to 
those  who  live  perpetually  among  adversaries,  hear- 
ing diatribes  all  day  long  against  the  Church,  the 
Council,  and  the  Holy  Father,  reading  anti-Catholic 
accounts  and  comments  upon  Catholic  doctrines, 
and  upon  the  words  and  acts  of  Catholic  Bishops, 
and  always  breathing,  till  they  are  unconscious  of 
it,  an  anti-Catholic  atmosphere. 

St.  Paul  has  foretold  that  "  In  the  last  days  shall 
come  dangerous  times,"  *  and  "  in  the  last  times 
some  shall  depart  from  the  faith."  f  Those  days 
seem  now  to  be  upon  us  ;  and  individuals  perhaps 
may  fall.  But  the  fall  of  leaves  and  sprays  and 
boughs  does  not  divide  the  Tree.  You  will  know 
how  to  deal  with  them  in  charity,  patience,  and 
firmness,  before  you  act  on  the  Apostolic  precept, 
"  A  man  that  is  a  heretic,  after  the  first  and  second 
admonition,  avoid."  :j:  You  will  use  all  the  patience 
of  charity,  but  you  will  use  also,  if  need  be  so,  its 
just  severity.  In  these  days,  laxity  is  mistaken  for 
charity,  and  indifference  to  truth  for  love  of  souls. 


*  3  Tim.  iii.  1. 


1 1  Tim.  iv.  1. 


X  Tit.  iii.  10. 


1 62 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


y  J 


Thi?  is  not  the  spirit  of  the  Apostle,  who  in  the 
excess  of  charity  declared  that  he  could  desire  "  to 
be  anathema  from  Christ  "  for  his  brethren  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh,  and  yet,  for  the  love  of  souls  could 
say,  "  I  would  they  were  even  cut  off,  who  trouble 
you  ;  "  *  because  the  purity  of  the  faith  is  vital  to 
the  salvation  of  souls,  and  the  salvation  of  the 
flock  must  be  preferred  to  the  salvation  of  a 
few. 

I  will  touch  but  one  other  topic,  and  then  make 
an  end.  The  same  prophets  who  foretold  disas- 
trous consequences  from  the  definition,  are  now 
foretelling  the  downfall  of  the  Temporal  Power. 
Day  by  day,  we  hear  and  read  contemptuous  cen- 
sures of  the  obstinacy  of  Pius  the  Ninth,  who  has 
ruined  himself  by  his  No/i  possumus,  and  sealed  his 
downfall  by  the  definition  of  his  own  infallibility. 
I  do  not  hesitate  to  say,  that  if  what  is  now  hap- 
pening had  been  caused  by  the  definition,  which  is 
not  the  fact,  yet  any  external  trials  would  be  better 
than  an  internal  conflict  arising  from  a  contradic- 
tion of  revealed  truth.  Gold  may  be  bought  too 
dear  ;  but  truth  cannot. 

Perhaps  we  ought  not  to  wonder  that  the  Prot- 
estant and  anti-Catholic  world  should  persist  in 
declaring  that  Rome,  by  the  definition  of  the  In- 
fallibility, has  altered  its  relations  to  the  world  ;  or, 
as  I  have  lately  read,  *'  disgusted  all  the  civil  govern- 
ments of  Europe."  They  do  not  know,  or  are  will- 
ingly ignorant,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Infallibility 
was  as  much  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  beiorc  as 
after  the  definition.     Tiie  definition  only  declares 


♦  Qal.  V.  la. 


CONCLUSION. 


163 


it  to  be  revealed  by  God.  The  relations  of  Rome 
to  the  Civil  Powers  are  therefore  precisely  what 
tley  were  before.  If  the  Civil  Powers  are  dis- 
jTusted,  it  is  only  because  the  (Ecumenical  Council 
declined  to  swerve  from  its  duty  in  compliance  to 
their  dictation  ;  or  because  they  can  no  longer 
affect  to  disbelieve  that  the  Infallibility  of  the  Ro- 
man Pontiff  is  the  true  and  traditional  doctrine  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  We  are  called  superstitious, 
because  we  do  not  believe  in  the  downfall  of  the 
Temporal  Power ;  and  obstinate,  because  we  will 
not  recognize  the  right  of  Italy  to  invade  the  Pa- 
trimony of  the  Church.  Our  superstition  consists 
in  this.  In  the  history  of  the  Church  the  Temporal 
Power  has  been  suppressed,  as  the  phrase  is,  over 
and  over  again.  The  first  Napoleon  suppressed  it 
twice.  The  Triumvirate  suppressed  it  in  1848. 
There  is  nothing  new  under  the  sun.  The  thing 
that  has  been,  is  the  thing  that  shall  be.  We  do 
not  believe  in  the  perpetuity  of  anything  but  the 
Church  ;  nor  in  the  finality  of  anything  but  justice. 
Sacrilege  carries  the  seeds  of  its  own  dissolution. 
A  robbery  so  unjust  cannot  endure.  When  or  how 
it  shall  be  chastised  we  know  not ;  but  the  day  of 
reckoning  is  not  less  sure  for  that.  Of  one  thing 
there  can  be  no  doubt :  the  nations  which  have 
conspired  to  dethrone  the  Vicar  of  Christ  will,  for 
that  sin,  be  scourged.  They  will,  moreover,  scourge 
one  another  and  themselves.  The  people  that  has 
the  chief  share  in  the  sin,  will  have  the  heaviest 
share  in  the  punishment.  We  arc  therefore  in  no 
way  moved.  If  it  be  God's  will  that  Mis  Church 
sliould  suffer  persecution,  it  will  be  thereby  puri- 
fied ;   but   the   persecut(jrs   will   fall   one   by   one. 


m 


■iii 


■  ;: 


i!    I 


164 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


Rome  has  seen  the  map  of  Europe  made  over  and 
over  again  ;  but  Rome  remains  changeless.  It  will 
see  out  the  present  dynasties  of  conquered  and 
conqueror ;  suffering,  it  may  be,  but  indefecti- 
ble. 

I  have  already  said,  that  the  definition  was  made 
on  the  eighteenth  of  July,  and  war  on  the  nine- 
teenth. Since  that  dcte,  a  crowd  of  events  have 
hurried  to  their  fulfilment.  The  French  Empire 
has  passed  away.  Rome  is  occupied  by  the  armies 
of  Italy.  The  peace  of  Europe  is  broken  ;  never 
again,  it  may  b'^,  to  be  restored,  till  the  scourges 
of  war  have  gone  their  circuit  among  the  nations. 
A  period  of  storm  has  set  in,  and  the  rising  waters 
of  a  flood  may  be  seen  approaching.  If  a  time  of 
trial  for  the  Church  is  at  hand,  a  time  of  ruin  and 
desolation  to  all  countries  in  Europe  will  come 
with  it.  The  Church  may  suffer,  but  cannot  die  ; 
the  dynasties  and  civil  societies  of  Europe  may 
not  only  suffer,  but  be  swept  away.  The  Head  of 
the  Church,  be  he  where  he  may,  in  Rome  or  in 
exile,  free  or  in  bondage,  will  be  all  that  the  Coun- 
cil of  the  Vatican  has  defined,  supreme  in  juris- 
diction, infallible  in  faith.  Go  where  he  may,  the 
faithful  throughout  the  world  will  see  in  him  the 
likeness  of  His  Divine  Master,  both  in  authority 
and  in  doctrine.  The  Council  has  thus  made  pnj- 
vision  for  the  Church  in  its  time  of  trial,  when,  it 
may  be,  not  only  (Ecumenical  Councils  cannot  be 
ncld,  but  even  the  ordinary  administration  of  ec- 
clesiastical government  and  consult^^tion  may  be 
hardly  possible. 

Peter's  bark  is  ready  for  the  storm.  All  that  is 
needful  is  already  on  board.     Past  ages  were  wild 


CONCLUSION. 


165 


v^er  and 
It  will 
ed  and 
dcfecti- 

s  made 
e  nine- 
:s  have 
Empire 
armies 

never 
ourges 
:ations. 
waters 
:ime  of 
lin  and 

come 
3t  die  ; 
e  may 
[ead  of 
!  or  in 
Coun- 
1  jiiris- 
ly,  the 
m  the 
hority . 
e  pnj- 
hen,  it 
lot  be 
of  cc- 
ay  be 

hat  is 
i  wild 


and  perilous,  but  the  future  bids  fair  to  exceed  them 
in  violence,  as  a  hurricane  exceeds  an  ordinary 
storm.  The  times  of  the  Council  of  Trent  were 
tempestuous ;  but  for  these  three  hundred  years 
the  licence  and  the  violence  of  free  thought,  free 
speech,  and  a  free  press,  which  spares  r.othing 
human  or  divine,  have  been  accumulating  in  vol- 
ume and  intensity.  All  this  burst  upon  the  Council 
of  the  Vatican.  And  in  the  midst  of  this,  the 
Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  abandoned  by  all  powers  of 
the  once  Christian  world,  stands  alone,  weak  but 
invincible,  the  supreme  judge  and  infallible  teacher 
of  men.  The  Church  has,  therefore,  its  provision 
for  faith  and  truth,  unity  and  order.  The  floods 
may  come,  the  rain  descend,  and  the  winds  blow 
and  beat  upon  it,  but  it  cannot  fall,  because  it  is 
founded  upon  Peter.  But  what  security  has  the 
Christian  world  ?  Without  helm,  chart,  or  light, 
it  has  launched  itself  into  the  falls  of  revolution. 
There  is  not  a  monarchy  that  is  not  threatened. 
In  Spain  and  France,  monarchy  is  already  over- 
thrown. The  hated  Syllabus  will  have  its  justifi- 
cation. The  Syllabus  which  condemned  Atheism 
and  revolution  would  have  saved  society.  But 
men  would  not.  They  are  dissolving  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Vicar  of  Christ.  And  why  do  they 
dissolve  it  ?  Because  governments  arc  no  longer 
Christian.  The  temporal  power  had  no  sphere, 
and  therefore  no  manifestation,  before  the  world 
was  Christian.  What  matter  will  it  have  for  its 
temporal  power,  when  the  world  has  ceased  to  be 
Christian  ?  For  what  is  the  temporal  pow  {r,  but 
the  condition  of  peaceful  independence  and  supreme 
direction  over  all  Christians,  and  all  Christian  so- 


Is^'iS 


1 66 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


ciecies,  inherent  in  the  office  of  Vicar  of  Christ, 
and  head  of  the  Christian  Church  ?  When  the 
Civil  powers  became  Christian,  faith  and  obedience 
restrained  them  from  casting  so  much  as  a  shadow 
of  human  sovereignty  over  the  Vicar  of  the  Son 
of  God.  They  who  attempt  it  now  will  do  it  at 
their  peril. 

The  Church  of  God  cannot  be  bound,  and 
its  liberty  is  in  its  head.  The  liberty  of  con- 
science and  of  faith,  since  the  Church  entered 
into  peace,  have  been  secured  in  his  independ- 
dence. 

For  a  thousand  years  his  independence,  which  is 
sovereignty,  has  been  secured  by  the  providence 
of  God  in  the  temporal  power  over  Rome  ;  the 
narrow  sphere  of  his  exemption  from  all  civil  sub- 
jection. But  men  are  nowadays  wiser  than  God, 
and  would  unmake  and  mend  His  works.  They 
are  therefore  dissolving  the  temporal  power  as  He 
has  fashioned  it ;  and  in  so  doing,  they  arc  striking 
out  the  keystone  of  the  arch  which  hangs  over 
their  own  heads.  This  done,  the  natural  society 
of  the  world  will  still  subsist,  but  the  Christian 
world  will  be  no  more.  One  thing  is  certain  :  let 
all  the  Civil  powers  of  this  world  in  turn,  or  all 
together,  claim  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ  as  their 
subject,  a  subject  he  will  never  be.  The  Non  pos- 
siuinis  is  not  only  immutable,  but  invin;  Ible.  The 
infallible  head  of  an  infallible  Church  can.iot  de- 
pend on  the  sovereignty  of  man.  The  Council  of 
the  Vatican  has  brought  out  this  truth  with  the 
evidence  of  light.  Tiic  world  may  despise  and 
fight  against  it,  but  the  Church  of  God  will  believe 
and  act  upon  this  law  of  divine  faith. 


CONCLUSION. 


167 


The  peoples  of  the  world  will  hear  him  gladly  ; 
but  the  rulers  see  in  him  a  superior,  and  will  not 
brook  it.  They  cannot  subdue  him,  and  they  will 
not  be  subject  to  his  voice.  They  are  therefore  in 
perpetual  conflict  with  him.  But  who  ever  fought 
against  him,  and  has  prospered  ?  Kings  have  car- 
ried him  captive,  and  princes  have  betrayed  him  ; 
but,  one  by  one,  they  have  passed  away,  and  he 
still  abides.  Their  end  has  been  so  tragically  ex- 
piiv.:'  that  all  men  may  read  its  meaning.  And  yet 
kings  and  princes  will  not  learn,  nor  be  wise. 
They  rush  against  the  rock,  and  perish.  The 
world  sees  their  ruin,  but  will  not  see  the  reason. 
The  faithful  read  in  the  ruin  of  all  who  lay  hands 
on  the  Vicar  of  Christ  the  warning  of  the  Psalmist, 
"  Nolite  tangere  Christos  meos  ;"  and  of  our  Lord 
Himself,  "  Whosoever  shall  fall  on  this  stone,  shall 
be  broken,  but  on  whomsoever  it  shall  fall,  it  will 
grind  him  to  powder."  * 

I  remain^  reverend  and  dear  Brethren, 

Your  affectionate  Servant  in  Christ, 

•J*  HENRY   EDWARD, 

Archbishop  of  Westminster. 
Feast  of  S.  Edward,  the  Confessor.  * 

^  -  '  ■  -  ■  ,   ■■,■■■■■. .  ■  I  ■        ■  „—  ■ .1  ■  ■  ,  .1  ■ 

*  St.  Matth.  xxl  44 


APPENDIX. 


^ 


I. 


POSTULATU..  OF  THE  BISHOPS  FOR  THE  DEFINITION 
OF  THE  INFALLIBILITY 


SACRO  CONCILIO  OECUMENICO  VATICANO. 

A  Sacra  Oecumenica  Synodo  Vaticana  infrascripti  Patres 
humillime  instanterque  flagitant,  ut  apertis,  omnemque  du- 
bitandi  locum  excludentibus  verbis  sancire  velit  supremam, 
ideoque  ab  errore  immunem  esse  Romani  Pontificis  auo- 
toritatem,  quum  in  rebus  fidei  et  morum  ea  statuit  ac  prae- 
cipit,  quae  ab  omnibus  cliristifidelibus  credenda  et  tenenda, 
quaeve  reiicienda  et  damnanda  sint. 


RATIONKS  OB  QUAS  HAKC  PROPOSITIO  OPPORTUNA  ET   NECKSSARIA 

CENSETUR. 

Romani  .Pontificis,  beati  Petri  Apostoli  successoris,  in 
universam  Christi  Ecclesiam  iurisdictionis,  adeoque  etiam 
Bupremi  magisterii  primatis  in  sacris  Scripturis  aperte  do- 
cetur. 

Universalis  et  constans  Ecclesiae  traditio  tum  factis  turn 
sanctorum  Patrum  eflfatis,  tum  plurimorum  Conciliorum, 
8  (169) 


I.-|: 


I/O 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


etiom  oecumenicormn,  et  agendi  et  loquendi  ratione  docet, 
Romani  Pontificis  iudicia  de  fidci  mommque  doctrina  irre- 
formabilia  esse. 

Conseniientibus  Graecis  et  Latinis,  in  Concilio  II  Lug- 
dunensi  admissa  professio  fidei  est,  in  qua  declaratiir  : 
"  Subortas  de  fide  controversias  debere  Romani  Pontificis 
iudicio  definiri."  In  Florentina  itidem  oecumenica  Synodo 
definitum  est  :  "  Romanum  Pontificpja  esse  verum  Cliristi 
Vicarium,  totiusque  Ecclesiae  caput,  et  omnium  christiau- 
orum  patrem  et  doctorem  ;  et  ipsi  in  beato  Petro  pascendi, 
regendi  ac  gubernandi  universalem  Ecclesiam  a  Domino 
nostro  lesu  Clu'isto  plenam  potestatem  traditam  esse." 
Ipsa  quoque  sana  ratio  docet,  neminem  stare  posse  in  fidei 
communione  cum  Ecclesia  catbolica,  qui  eius  capiti  non 
consentiat,  quum  ne  cogitatione  quidem  Ecclesiam  a  suo 
capite  separare  liceat. 

Attamen  fuerunt  atque  adhucdum  sunt,  qui,  catbolicorum 
nomine  gloriantes,  eoque  etiam  ad  infirmorum  in  fide  per- 
niciein  abutentes,  docere  praesumant,  earn  sufficere  sub- 
missionom  erga  Romani  Pontificis  auctoritatem,  qua  eius 
de  fide  moribusque  decreta  obsequioso,  ut  aiunt,  silentio,  sine 
intenio  mentis  assensu,  vel  provisorie  tantum,  usquedum  de 
Ecclesiae  assensu  vel  dissensu  constiterit,  suscipiantm*. 

Hacce  porro  perversa  doctrina  Romani  Pontificis  auc- 
toritatem subverti,  fidei  unitatem  dissipaii,  erroribus  cam- 
pum  amplissimum  aperiri,  tempusque  late  serpendi  tribui, 
nemo,  non  videt. 

Quare  Episcopi,  catbolicao  veritatis  custodes  et  vin- 
dices,  his  potissimum  temporibus  connisi  sunt,  ut  su- 
premam  Apostolicae  Sedis  docendi  auctoritatem  sj^nodali- 
bus  praesertim  decretis  et  coumiuuibus  testimoniis  tuer- 
entur.* 

Quo  evidentius  vero  catliolica  Veritas  praedicabutur,  eo 


*  1.  Concilium  provincinlc  Volonicnsc,  anno  1800  cclcbratnm,  cui,  prac- 
ter  euiinentissimum  Curdinalor.i  et  Arcliiepiscopum  Colonicnscra,  loan- 
nem  de  Geissel,  quimiue  bubBcripcruut  Episcopi,  discrtc  docet:  "Ipso 


APPENDIX. 


171 


vehementius,  tarn  libellis  quam  ephemeridibus,  nuperrime 
impugnata  est,  ut  catholicus  populus  contra  sanam  doctrin- 
ani  commoveretm",  ipsaque  Vaticuna  Synodus  ab  ea  proclar 
manda  absterreretur. 

Qua  re,  si  irntea  de  opportunitate  istius  doctrinae  in  boc 
Oecuii^enico  Concilio  pronuntiandae  a  pluribus  dubitari  ad- 
huc  potuit,  nunc  earn  definire  nccessarium  prorsus  videtur. 
Catholica  enim  doctrina  iisdem  plane  argumentis  denuo 
impetitur,  quibus  olim  homines,  proprio  iudicio  condemnati, 
adversus  earn  utebantur  ;  quibus,  si  urgeantur,  ipse  Ro- 
mani  Pontificis  primatus,  Ecclesiaeque  infallibilitas  pes- 
sumdatur ;  et  quibus  saepe  deterrima  convicia  contra 
Apostolicam  Sedem  admi.:.centur.  Lumo  acerbissimi  ca- 
tholicae  doctrinae  impuguatores,  licet  catholicos  se  dicant, 

(Romanus  Pontifex)  est  omnium  Christianorum  pater  ct  doctor,  cuius  in 
Jidci  quaestionibus  per  se  irreformabilc  est  ittdicium." 

2.  Episcopi  in  Concilio  pi-oviuciali  Ultraicctensi  anno  1805  congregnti 
apcrtissinie  edicunt :  "  (Romani  Pontificis)  indicium  in  iis,  quae  ad  fidcm 
moresque  spectant,  iufallibUe  esse,  indubitanter  retincnius." 

3.  Concilium  proviucialc  Uuloccnsc,  anno  18G0  celebratum,  Laec  statuit: 
"  Qucmadmodum  Potrus  erat  .  .  .  doctrinae  fidui  magister  irrefragabilis, 
pro  quo  ipse  Dominus  rogavit,  ut  non  deficeret  fldcs  cius  .  .  . ;  pari 
modo  legitimi  cius  in  catlicdrac  Romanae  culmine  succcssores  .  .  .  de- 
positum  iidci  summo  ct  irrcfragabili  oraculo  custodiunt  .  .  .  Undc  pro 
positioncs  dori  guUicani  anno  1G8;3  cditas,  quas  iam  piae  memoriae  Geor 
gius  Arcliiepiscopus  Strigouicusis  una  cum  ceteris  ITungariac  Praesulibus 
codcm  adliuc  anno  publico  proscripsit,  itidcm  reiicimus,  proscribimus, 
atque  cunctis  Provinciae  huius  tidclibus  interdicimus,  ne  cas  legcre  vel 
tcncrc,  raulto  minus  doccre  audcrcnt." 

4.  Concilium  plenarium  Baltimorense,  anno  18GG  coactuni,  in  decretis, 
quibus  44  Archicpiscopi  ct  Episcopi  subscripserunt,  inter  all  a  luiec  doect : 
"  Viva  ct  infivUibilis  auctoritas  in  ca  tantum  vigct  Ecclesia,  quae  a  Christo 
Domino  supra  Pctrum,  fotius  Ecclcsiae  caput,  principem  et  pastorem, 
cuius  fldem  nunquam  dofocturani  promisit,  aedilicata,  suos  legitimos  sem- 
per liabct  Pontiliecs,  sine  intcrmis^ione  ab  ipso  Pctro  ducentcs  origiuem, 
in  eiuy  cathedra  coUocato.'^,  ct  ciusdem  ctiam  doctrinae,  dignitatis,  honoris 
et  i)otcstatis  haeredcs  et  vindiccs.  Et  quoniam  nbi  Petrus,  ibi  Ecclesia, 
ac  Petrus  per  Romanum  Pontiliccm  locpiitur  et  semper  In  suis  siiccessori- 
bus  vivit  et  iudicium  exercet,  uc  pracstat  quacrentibus  lldci  vcritatem ; 
idriiro  dlvina  cloquia  co  plane  scwm  stt/it  accipicnda,  quae  iciiuit  ac  tenet  haee 
IioiiiiDia  bcalissiini  Petri  cathedra,  quae  omnium  Ecclesianun  mater  ct 
magistra,  fldem  a  Chnsto  Domino  traditam  iutegram  Inviolatamquo 


Itei 


172 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


blaterare  non  erubescmit,  Florentinam  Synodum,  supremam 
Komani  Pontificis  auctoritatem  luculentissime  profitentem, 
oecumenicam  non  fuisse. 

Si  igitur  Concilium  Vaticamim,  adeo  provocatum,  taceret 
et  catholicae  doctrinae  testimonium  dare  negligerct,  tunc 
catholicus  populus  de  vera  doctrina  reapse  dubitare  in- 
ciperet,  neoterici  autem  gloriantes  assererent,  Concilium 
ob  argumenta  ab  ipsis  aUata  siluisse.  Quinimmo  silentio 
hoc  semper  abuterentur,  ut  Apostolicae  Sedis  iudiciis  et 
decretis  circa  fidem  et  mores  palam  obedientiam  negarent, 
sub  praetextu  quod  Bomanus  Pontifex  in  eiusmodi  iudiciis 
faUi  potuerit. 

Publicum  itaque  rei  christianae  bommi  postulare  videtur, 
ut  Sacrosanctum  Concilium  Vaticanum,  Florentinum  de- 

Bcmper  eervavit,  eamque  fldeles  edocuit,  omnibus  ostendens  salutis  scmitam  et 
incoruptae  veritatis  doctrinam. 

5.  Coucilium  primum  provinciale  Westmonastcriensc,  anno  1853  habi- 
tum,  profitetur:  "Cum  Dominus  nostcr  adhortctur  dicens:  Attendite 
ad  petram,  uude  excisi  estis ;  attendite  ad  Abraham,  patrera  vestrum : 
aequum  est,  nos,  qui  immediate  ab  Apostolica  Sede  fidem,  sacerdotium, 
veramque  religionem  accepimus,  eidem  plus  ceteris  amoris  et  obscr- 
vantiae  vinculis  udstringi.  Fundamentum  igitur  verae  et  orihodoxa:  Jidei 
ponimus,  quod  Domitius  nostcr  lesus  Christiis  ponere  vohiit  incoyicussum, 
scilicet  Petri  cathedram,  totius  orbis  inof/istram  ct  matrcm,  S.  liomanam  Ec- 
clesiam.  Qnidquid  ab  ipsa  senicl  d<;flnitum  est,  eo  ipso  ratum  ct  ccrtum  tcne- 
mus;  ipsius  traditiones,  ritus,  pios  usus  et  omnes  apostolicas  constitu- 
tioDCs,  disciplinam  respicicntes,  toto  cordo  amplcctimiir  et  veneramur. 
Summo  denique  Pontiflci  obcdientam  et  reverentiam,  ut  Cliristi  Vicarlo, 
ex  animo  proiitemur,  cique  arctissime  in  catholica  commuuionc  adhaere- 
mus." 

6.  Quingenti  prope  Episcopi,  ex  toto  tcrramm  orbe  ad  agenda  solemnia 
saecularia  Martyrii  Sanctorum  Petri  ct  Pauli  anno  1867  in  liac  alma  Urbe 
congrcgati,  minime  dubitarunt,  Supremum  Pontificcm  Pium  IX  liisce 
alloqui  verbis :  "  Pctrura  per  os  Pii  locutum  fuisse  credentes,  quae  ad 
custodiendum  dcpositum  a  Te  dicta,  conllrmata,  prolata  sunt,  nos  quoiaio 
dicunus,  conllrmamus,  annunciamus,  unoquc  ore  atque  animo  reiiciinus 
omnia,  quae  divinac  fldei,  saluti  animarum,  ipsi  socictatis  Inimanac  bono 
adversa,  Tu  ipse  reprobanda  ac  reiicienda  iudicasti,  Firnmin  cnim 
racnti  nostrae  est,  altequo  defixum,  quod  Patres  Fiorcntini  in  dccrcto 
unionis  delinierunt :  Romanum  Pontificcm  Cliristi  Viearium,  totius 
Ecclcsiae  caput  et  omnium  Christianorum  Patrcm  et  Doctorcm  ex- 
Bistere." 


APPENDIX. 


173 


iremam 
tentem, 

taceret 
et,  tunc 
are  iu- 
nciliiini 
silentio 
iciis  et 
garent, 
iudieiis 

vicletur, 
um  de- 

•cmitam  et 

853  habi- 
A.ttendite 
vestrum : 
irdotium, 
et  obser- 
oxa:  Jidei 
ncussum, 
mam  Ec- 
turn  tcnc- 
constitu- 
icramur. 
Vicario, 
adhacre- 

solemnia 
na  Urbe 
X  hisco 
quae  ad 

(1U0(JUCJ 

.'iiclmus 
ac  bono 
11  cnirn 
decrcto 
I  totius 
em  cx- 


cretum  de  Romano  Pontifice  denuo  profitens  et  uberius 
esplicans,  apertis,  omnemque  dubitandi  locum  praecluden- 
tibus  verbis  sancire  velit  supremam,  ideoque  ab  errore  im- 
munem  esse  eiusdem  Ivwmani  Pontificis  auctoritatem,  qumn 
in  rebus  fidei  et  morum  ea  statuit  ac  praecipit,  quae  ab  om- 
nibus cliristifidelibus  credenda  et  tenenda,  quaeve  reiicienda 
et  damnanda  sint. 

Non  desimt  quidera  qui  existiment,  a  catholica  hac  veri- 
tate  sancienda  abstinendum  esse,  ne  schismatici  atque 
haeretici  longius  ab  Ecclesia  arceantur.  Sed  in  primis 
catholicus  populus  ius  habet,  ut  ab  Oecumenica  Synodo 
doceatur,  quid  in  re  tam  gravi,  et  tarn  improbe  nuper  im- 
pugnata,  credendum  sit,  ne  simplices  et  incautos  multorum 
animos  pemiciosus  error  tandem  comampat.  Idcirco  etiam 
Lugdunenses  et  Tridentini  Patres  rectam  doctrinam  stabi- 
liendam  esse  censuerunt,  etsi  schismatici  et  haeretici  oflfen- 
derentur.  Qui  si  sincera  mente  veritatem  quaerant,  non 
absterrebuntur  sed  alhcientur,  dum  ipsis  ostenditui",  quo 
potissimum  fundament©  cathoHcae  Ecclesiae  unitas  et  fir- 
mitas  nitatur.  Si  qui  autem,  vera  doctrina  ab  Ocumenico 
Concilio  definita,  ab  Ecclesia  deficerent,  hi  numero  pauci 
et  iamdudum  in  fide  nnnfragi  sunt,  praetextum  solummodo 
quaerentes,  quo  extern  etiam  actione  ab  Ecclesia  se  ex- 
imant,  quam  intemo  sensu  iam  deseruisse  palam  ostendunt. 
Hi  sunt,  qui  catholicum  p«  /j)ulum  continuo  turbare  non  ab- 
horruerunt,  et  a  quorum  insidiis  Vaticana  Synodus  fideles 
Ecclesiae  fiUos  tueri  debebit.  Catholicus  enimvero  populus, 
semper  edoctus  et  assuetus,  Apostolicis  Romani  Pontificis 
decretis  plonissimum  mentis  et  oris  obsequium  exhibere, 
Vaticani  Concilii  sententiam  de  eiusdem  suprema  et  ab 
en-ore  immuni  auctoritato  laeto  fidehque  animo  excipiet. 


174 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


TRANSLATION  OF  THE  POSTULATUM  FOR  THE 

DEFINITION. 

TO   THE  HOLT   CECUMENICAL   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

Tlie  imdersigned  Fathers  hmnbly  and  earnestly  heg  the 
holy  (Ecumenical  Council  of  the  Vatican  to  define  clearly, 
and  in  words  that  cannot  be  mistaken,  that  the  authority 
of  the  Roman  Pontiff  is  supreme,  and,  therefore,  exempt 
from  error,  when  in  mattei-s  of  faith  and  morals  he  declares 
and  defines  what  is  to  bo  beheved  and  held,  and  what  to 
be  rejected  and  condemned,  by  all  the  faithful. 


Reasons  fob  wmcu  Tms  DKFiNiTion  is  thought  Opportune  ] 

AND  NeCESS.VKY. 

The  Sacred  Scriptures  plauily  teach  the  Primacy  of  ju- 
risdiction of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  the  Successor  of  St.  Peter, 
over  the  whole  Church  of  Christ,  and,  therefore,  also  his 
Primacy  of  supreme  teaching  authority. 

The  universal  and  constant  tradition  of  the  Church,  as 
seen  both  in  facts  and  in  the  teaching  of  the  Fathers,  as 
well  as  in  the  manner  of  acting  and  speaking  adopted  by 
many  Councils,  some  of  which  were  CEcumenical,  teaches 
us  that  the  judgments  of  the  Roman  l*ontiff  in  matters  of 
faith  and  morals  are  iiTcformable.  • 

In  the  iSpcond  Council  of  Lyons,  with  the  consent  of 
both  Greeks  and  Latins,  a  profession  of  faith  was  agreed 
upon,  which  declares  :  "  "When  controversica  in  matters  of 
foith  arise,  they  nmst  bo  settled  by  the  decision  of  the  Ro- 
man Pontiff."  ^Moreover,  in  the  Oecumenical  Synod  of 
Florence,  it  was  defined  that  "the  Roivian  PontitT  is 
Christ's  true  Vicar,  the  Head  of  the  whole  Chu'di,  and 
Father  and  Teacher  of  aU  Christijins ;  and  that  to  him,  in 
blflssed  Peter,  was  giNcn  by  Jesus  Chiist  the  plonitudo  of 


APPENDIX. 


175 


power  to  rule  and  goverr  the  mijversal  Church."  Sound 
reason,  too,  teaches  us  that  i?o  one  can  remain  in  commun- 
ion of  faith  with  the  Cathohc  Church  who  is  not  of  one 
mind  with  its  head,  since  the  Church  cannot  be  separated 
h'om  its  head  even  in  thought. 

Yet  some  have  been  found,  and  are  even  now  to  be  found, 
who,  boasting  of  the  name  of  Cathohc,  and  using  that 
name  to  the  ruin  of  those  weak  in  faith,  are  bold  enough 
to  teach,  that  sufficient  submission  is  yielded  to  the  author- 
ity of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  if  we  receive  his  decrees  in  mat- 
ters of  faith  and  morals  witii  an  obsequious  silence,  as  it 
is  termed,  without  yielding  internal  assent,  or,  at  most, 
with  a  provisional  assent,  until  the  approval  or  disapproval 
of  the  Church  has  been  made  known.  Any  one  can  see 
that  by  this  perverse  doctiine  the  authority  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff  is  overturned,  all  unity  of  faith  dissolved,  a  wide 
field  open  to  errors,  and  leisure  afforded  for  spreading  them 
far  and  wide. 

Wherefore  the  Bisho])s,  the  guardians  and  protectors  of 
Catholic  truth,  have  endeavored,  especially  now-a-days,  to 
defend  in  their  Sj-nodal  decrees,  and  by  then*  united  testi- 
mony, the  supreme  authority  of  the  Apostohc  See.* 

But  the  more  clearly  Catholic  truth  has  been  declared, 
the  more  vehemently  has  it  been  attacked  both  in  books 
and  in  newspaoora,  for  the  purpose  of  exciting  Catholics 
against  sound  dc  ctrine,  and  preventing  the  Council  of  the 
Vaticiyi  fi'om  defining  it. 

Though,  then,  in  times  past  many  might  have  doubted 
the  oppoiiuiienesG  of  declaring  this  doctrine  in  the  present 
OEcumenical  Council,  it  would  seem  now  to  be  absolutely 
necessary  to  define  it.  For  Catholic  doctrine  is  now  once 
more  assailed  l)y  those  same  arguments  which  men,  con- 
demned by  then*  own  conscience,  used  agahist  it  in  old 
tunes  ;  arguments  wliich,  if  carried  to  their  ultimate  con- 


*  Many  ppcciiiictis  of  tliis  testimony  are  collected  in  the  following  Ap- 
ptudix  to  the  rostulatuiu. 


ni 


h  fk 


■-"w 


176 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


sequences,  would  bring  to  the  pfi'ound  the  very  Primacy  of 
the  Roman  Pontiff  and  the  infalhbihty  of  the  Church  it- 
self; and  to  which,  also,  is  frequently  added  the  most 
violent  abuse  of  the  Apostolic  See.  Nay,  more ;  the  most 
bitter  assailants  of  Catholic  doctrine,  though  calling  them- 
selves Cathohcs,  are  not  ashamed  to  assert  that  the  Synod 
of  Florence,  which  so  clearly  declares  the  supreme  authority 
of  the  Boman  Pontif,  was  not  (Ecumenical . 

If,  then,  the  Council  of  the  Vatican,  being  thus  chal- 
lenged, wero  to  be  silent,  and  omit  to  give  testimony  to  the 
Cathohc  doctrine  on  this  point,  then  Catholics  would,  in 
fact,  begin  to  doubt  the  true  doctrine,  and  the  novelty- 
mongers  would  triumphantly  assert  that  the  Council  had 
been  silenced  by  the  arguments  brought  forward  by  them. 
They  would,  moreover,  abuse  this  silence  on  every  occasion, 
and  openly  deny  the  obedience  due  to  the  judgments  and 
decrees  of  the  Ajiostohc  See  in  matters  of  faith  and  mor- 
als, under  pretext  that  the  judgment  of  the  Koman  Pontiff 
is  fallible  on  such  points. 

Wherefore  the  public  good  of  Christianity  seems  to  re- 
quire that  the  holy  Council  of  the  Vatican,  professing  once 
again,  and  explaining  more  fiiUy,  the  Florentine  decree, 
should  define  clearly,  and  in  words  chat  can  admit  of  no 
doubt,  that  the  authority  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  is  pupremo, 
and,  therefore,  exempt  from  error,  when  in  matters  of 
faith  and  morals  he  decrees  and  ordains  what  is  to  be  be- 
lieved and  hold  by  all  the  faithful  of  Christ,  and  wjiat  to 
be  rejected  and  condemned  by  them. 

There  ai'c,  indeed,  some  who  think  that  this  CathoUo 
truth  should  not  bo  defined,  lest  schismatics  and  heretics 
should  be  repelled  yet  further  from  the  Church.  Hut, 
above  all  other  considerations,  Catholics  have  a  right  to  be 
taught  by  tl.'e  Qiicunienical  Coiuicil  what  thoy  are  to  believe 
in  so  weighty  a  matter,  and  one  which  has  been  of  late  so 
iniquitously  attacked  ;  lest  this  pernicious  error  should  in 
the  end  infect  simple  minds,  and  the  masses  of  people  un- 


APPENDIX. 


^17 


awares.  Hence  it  was  that  tlie  Fathers  of  Lyons  and  of 
Trent  deemed  themselves  bound  to  estabUsh  the  doctrine  of 
the  tinith,  notwithstanding  tlie  oflfence  that  might  l)e  taken 
by  scliismatics  and  heretics.  For  if  these  seek  the  truth 
in  sincerity,  they  will  not  be  repelled,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
drawn  towards  us,  when  thev  see  on  what  foundations  the 
unity  and  strength  of  the  Catholic  Church  chiefly  repose. 
IJut,  should  any  leave  the  Church  in  consequence  of  the 
tine  docti'ine  being  defined  by  the  (Ecumenical  Council, 
these  wOl  be  few  in  niunbcr,  and  such  as  have  already  suf- 
fered shipwreck  in  the  faith  ;  such  as  are  only  seeldng  a 
pretext  to  abandon  that  Church  by  an  overt  act,  wliich  they 
plainly  show  they  have  deserted  already  in  heart.  These 
are  the}'  who  have  never  slirujik  from  disturbing  our  Cath- 
olic people  ;  and  from  the  snares  of  sucli  men  the  Council 
of  the  Vatican  ought  to  protect  the  faithful  childi'en  of  the 
Church.  For  all  true  Catholics,  taught  and  accustomed 
to  render  the  fullest  obedience  both  of  thought  and  word 
to  the  Apostolic  decrees  of  the  Roman  PontilV,  will  receive 
witli  joyful  and  devoted  hearts  tlie  definition  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  the  Vatican  concerning  Ins  supreme  and  infalUble 
authority. 

APPENDIX. 


Decisions  of  Provisional  Synods  recently  held,  showing  the 
Common  Opinion  of  Blsiiops  concerning  tue  Supreme  and 
Infallible  authority  of  the  Roman  1'ontut  in  matters 
of  Fajth  and  Moraijs. 

1.  The  Provincial  Council  held  at  Cologne  in  18G0,  to 
which,  in  addition  to  his  Eminence  Cardinal  Geissel,  Ai'ch- 
bishop  of  Cologne,  five  Hishops  subscribed,  expressly  de- 
clared :  "  He  (the  Roman  Pontiif )  is  the  father  and  teacher 
of  all  Christians,  u7<o.sc'  Jiuhjtnent  in  qucslions  of  faith  is 
^ per  sc' unaUcrahh'.'^ 

2.  The  Bishops  assembled  in  the  Provincial  Council, 

8* 


it 


11' 


178 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


held  at  Utrecht  m  18G5,  most  openly  assert  :  "  "We  unhes- 
itatingly hold  that  tlie  judgment  of  the  Iloman  Pontifif  in 
matters  wliich  refer  to  faith  and  morals  is  infallible." 

3.  The  Provincial  Council  of  Prague,*  in  18G0,  to  which 
his  Eminence  Carduial  Ai'chbishop  Frederic  de  Schwar- 
zenberg  and  foiu'  otlier  Bishops  Hnbscribcd,  under  the 
heading,  "  On  the  Primacy  of  the  Iloman  Pontifif,"  decreed 
as  foUows  :  "  Wo  reject,  moreoA  er,  the  error  of  those  who 
pretend  tliat  the  Chiu'ch  can  exist  anywhere  without  being 
joined  in  bonds  of  imion  with  the  Chm*ch  of  liome,  in 
which  the  tradition  which  has  been  handed  do^vii  by  the 
Apostles,  has  been  preserved  by  those  who  are  in  eveiy 
part."     (S.  IrenrouH,  Ado.  h(er.  1.  8,  c.  3,  n.  2.) 

''  We  know  diat  no  one  who  is  not  johied  to  the  Head 
can  be  considered  as  a  member  of  the  Body  of  the  Church 
wliich  Christ  foiuided  on  Peter,  and  established  on  his  au- 
thority. Let  ah  then  prefer  to  confess  witli  us  and  with 
the  multitude  jf  orthodox  behevers  spread  over  the  whole 
world,  the  Headship  of  tlie  Iloman  Church  and  the  Pri- 
macy of  the  Iloman  Pontifl' ;  let  them,  as  is  fitting,  with 
us,  reverence  and  honor  with  dutiful  aflfcclioii  our  ]\Iost 
Holy  Father  I'ius  IX.,  by  (iod's  Providence  Pope,  the 
lawful  Successor  of  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  the  Vicar 
of  Chiist  on  earth,  the  Chief  Teacher  of  Faitli,  and  Pilot 
of  the  Ship  of  Christ,  to  whom  OiP,  //(o.-Y  cj-ad  obedience  and 
internal  assent  i><  due  /row  all  icho  vi^tJi  to  belong  to  the  fold 
of  Chrid.  We  declare  and  teach,  that  this  authority  of 
the  Ror.  .<)  Pontiff  comes  from  Chi'ist  our  Lord,  and  that 
consequently  it  in  depe  ident  upon  no  power  or  favor  of 
men,  and  remtiLu  unimpaired  in  all  tinujs,  even  in  the 
most  bitfpji'  pc.rf, ecu  1:0ns  which  the  Church  of  Homo  has 
siiflfered,  ., '  ^-m  'lie  case  duriii^^'^  the  imprisoimient  and 
martyrdoi'i  'if  b    'jsed  Peter, ' 

■k.  The  Pios.M'iu!  Ccincilof  Kaloczrt,  held  hi  1800,  do- 


"  fi  i 


*  Tills  OounclJ  ffr.t  gir.*  mcludcd  iu  the  origlutvl  draught  from  which 
the  Lutlri  is  iak'j^y 


APPENDIX. 


179 


clared  :  "  That  as  Peter  was  .  .  .  the  iiTcfntable  teacher 
of  the  doctrmes  of  faith,  for  whom  the  Lord  Himself 
prayed  that  his  faith  might  not  fail  ;  so  liis  legitimate  suc- 
cessors seated  aloft  on  the  Chau*  of  Komc  .  .  .  preserve 
the  deposit  of  faith  with  supreme  and  u'refutable  powers 
of  declaring  the  truth.  .  .  .  A\'herefore  we  also  reject,  pro- 
scribe, and  forbid  all  the  faithful  of  this  Pro^^nce,  to  read 
or  maintain,  and  much  more  to  teach,  the  propositions 
published  by  the  Galilean  Clergy  in  1682,  which  have  al- 
ready been  censiu'ed  this  same  year  by  the  Archbishop  of 
Gran,  of  pious  memoiy,  and  by  the  other  Bishops  of  Hun- 

gaiy." 

5.  The  I'lenary  '^omicil  of  Baltimore,  which  met  in  18GG, 
and  to  which  44  Ai'chbishops  and  Bishops  subscribed, 
says :  "  The  hving  and  infallible  authority  flomishcs  in 
that  Church  alone  which  was  built  by  Christ  upon  Peter, 
who  is  thf!  Head,  Leader,  and  Pastor  of  the  whole  Churcli, 
whose  faith  Christ  promised  should  never  fail ;  which  ever 
had  legitimate  Pontifl's,  dating  then*  origin  in  unbroken 
hue  fi'om  Peter  huuself,  being  seated  in  his  Chah,  and  be- 
ing the  inheritors  and  dei'enders  of  the  hke  doctrine,  dig- 
nity, oflico,  and  power.  And  because,  where  Peter  is, 
there  also  is  the  Church,  and  because  Peter  speaks  in  tho 
j)erKon  of  the  Roman  l*ontiiT,  ever  lives  in  his  successors, 
passes  judgment,  and  makes  known  the  truths  of  faith  to 
those  who  seek  them  ;  tlwnj'ovt'.  are  the  Divine  deelaratiowA 
to  he  received  in  that  sense  in  wJiieJi  tlieij  hare  been  and  are 
held  by  IJiif.  lloniaii  S<'e  of  hh-ssed  refer,  that  mother  and 
teacher  of  all  Churches,  wliicli  has  ever  preserved  wholo 
and  eutho  the  teaching  delivered  by  Christ,  and  which  has 
iniKjht  it  to  the  faithful,  shoidng  to  all  men  the  paths  of  mica- 
lion  and  the  doctrine  of  eucrlastintj  tridJi" 

(i.  'J'he  first  Prt)vincial  ('ouncu  of  Westminster,  held  iu 
1852,  states  :  "  When  our  IJles'ied  Lord  exhorts  us,  sayhig, 
Tjook  to  the  rock  wlience  you  are  hewn  ;  look  to  Abraham 
your  fatlier,  it  is  litting  that  wo  who  hxvo  received  our 


i8o 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Il  fiL 


faith,  our  priesthood,  and  the  true  religion,  directly  from 
the  Apostolic  See,  should  more  than  others  be  attached  to 
it  by  the  bonds  of  love  and  fidehty.  Tlicrcforc  do  ive  main- 
tain that  foundation  of  truth  and  orthodoxy  which  Jcsits 
Christ  grilled  shoidd  be  maintained  unshal'cn  ;  namehj,  the 
See  (f  Peter,  the  teacher  and  mother  of  the  whole  world,  the 
Hohj  lioman  Church.  WJiatcver  is  once  defined  Inj  it,  for 
that  very  reason  alone  we  consider  to  be  fixed  and  certain  ; 
when  we  look  at  its  traditions,  rites,  pious  customs,  discip- 
line, and  !^]1  its  Apostolic  Constitutions,  we  follow  and 
cherish  them  with  all  the  affection  of  our  hearts.  In  line, 
we  of  set  purpose  publicly  declare  our  obedience  and  re- 
spect for  the  Pope  as  (^'iiist's  Vicar,  and  we  remai;  united 
to  him  in  the  closest  bondu  )f  Catholic  unity," 

7.  Nearly  five  hundred  of  the  Bishops  asseml:>led  in 
llnjie  to  celebrate  the  CVnteuary  of  the  Mart;)Tdom  of  SS. 
Peter  and  Paul,  in  the  year  1807,  had  no  hesitation  in  ad- 
dressing Pius  IX.  m  the  foUor  ."  ag  terms  :  "  IJeHeving  that 
Peter  has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Pius,  whatever  has  been 
said,  confirmed,  and  decreed  by  You  to  preserve  the  de- 
posit of  faith,  we  also  repen.t,  confii-m,  and  profess,  and 
with  one  mind  aiid  heart  we  reject  all  that  You  have  judged 
it  necessary  to  reprove  and  condemn  as  contrary  to  Divme 
faith,  to  the  salvation  of  souls,  and  to  the  good  of  society. 
For  what  the  Fathers  of  Florence  defined  in  then'  Decree 
of  Union,  is  firmly  and  deeply  impressed  in  om*  minds  ; 
that  the  Roman  Pontiff  is  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  the  Head 
of  the  whole  Chm*ch,  the  Father  and  Teacher  of  all  Chris- 
tiang." 


APPENDIX. 


i8i 


n. 


LETTER  OF  H. 


E.   CARDINAL   ANTONELLI  TO  THE 
NUNCIO   AT   PARIS. 


Rome,  March  19th,  1870. 

My  Lord  : — The  Marquis  do  Baiinevillc,  ambassador  <  f 
bis  ]Majesty,  read  me,  a  few  days  a^o,  a  desiiatcli  forwarded 
to  him  under  date  February  20,  hist,  from  Coimt  Daru, 
Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs,  relative  to  the  affairs  of  the 
Comicil.  In  this  communication,  of  which  the  ambassador 
was  kind  enough  to  leave  mc  a  copy,  the  aforesaid  minis- 
ter, referrmg  to  the  resolution  come  to  by  the  French  (Jov- 
enimcnt  not  to  take  part  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Gen- 
eral Council,  desu'ing  at  the  same  time  its  hberty  to  bo 
guaranteed  fully  and  absolutely,  states  that  such  rescjlution 
was  based  on  the  supposition  that  that  venerable  assembly 
would  occupy  itself  solely  about  the  sacred  mterests  of  tho 
Faith,  and  would  abstain  from  touching  questions  of  a 
purt'ly  political  order.  But  the  publicati(m  (ho  says)  by 
the  "Augsburg  (Jazetto  "  of  the  canons  appertainuig  to 
the  draft  of  constitution  on  tho  Church  and  ou  the  Roman 
I'ontiir,  showiug  that  there  is  question  of  decidmg  whether 
the  povvcr  of  the  Church  and  of  her  Head  extends  to  tho 
whole  aggregate  of  ])olitical  rights  ;  the  govennnent,  keep- 
iug  fu'mly  to  the  resolution  of  leavmg,  upon  this  pomt 
also,  entire  liberty  to  the  deliberations  of  the  august  as- 
sembly, intends  to  exercise  tho  rights  given  it  by  the  Con- 
cordat of  making  known  to  tho  Council  its  opiuiou  on 
questions  of  such  nature. 

Passing  to  the  examination  of  tho  said  canons,  tho  min- 


#!i 


182 


THE  VATICASf  COUNCIL. 


ister  iNBtts  w^  tlieir  contentm  («.»•  whicli  lie  wishes?  to  com- 
ment) m  tbe  tvw  ji(.>llowf*i'pr  projwsitious  : — Fii-st,  "  the 
luftilUbilit;  ^f  tb/i  dmeeh  es^eiidB  n»ot  only  to  the  Deposit 
of  Faith,  l>ut  to  iM  *haX  is  m^riessarr  for  thf>  jireservai^on 
of  such  deposit  ;"  ar,.'  vTMncUy,  "the  Cliiuvh  is  c^  society 
divhie  and  ptTfect ;  tltr  jpt^wer  is  exercise*^  at  once  in  furo 
intcnio  ft  e.rfri-fio  ;  m  ^jmsiait^.  in  flhe  legadative,  judicial, 
and  coercive  order,  awtiipfi^  be  exeix-ised  \>y  her  with  full 
liberty  and  independence  Imm  a*^'^  civil  power  whatever." 
Hence,  as  corollaries  of  thesis  #•«)  j^opositions,  hf  deduces 
tlie  extension  of  infallibihty  t^^Hkait'm  thought  j*i»5eessary 
for  the  defence  of  revealed  trufiM;^  mid  consequepliy  t<^ 
facts,  whether  historical,  philo>y>',r  i^cai,  or  wcientifi^  ex- 
ternal to  revelation  ;  as  also  the  ahh<*i»«te  i**bordinatiop  to 
the  supreme  authority  of  the  Chur<*i  M  ibe  con«titue«it 
principles  of  civil  so  -ioty  ;  of  the  rights  ''  ""  ities  &f  Gov- 
ernment;  of  the  political  rights  and  d  ■'*'  <?.iBis5ens, 
whether  electoral  or  municiptd  ;  of  all  tliu'  ^  eht;..'-  t<v-t,he 
judicial  and  legislative  order,  as  well  in  resijc-t  of  jW  ^'nmf 
as  of  thhigs  ;  of  the  rules  of  public  administrationu ,  (0f 
the  rights  and  duties  of  coi-porations,  and,  in  general^  of 
all  the  rights  of  the  State,  not  excluding  the  rights  of  con- 
quest, peace,  and  war. 

Next  the  minister  passes  on  to  note  the  profound  uu- 
pression  Avbich  the  simple  enunciation  of  such  doctrines 
must  produce  in  th(>  entire  world  ;  and  asks  at  the  same 
time  how  it  could  be  possil)lo  for  the  liishops  to  consent  to 
abdicate  their  (episcopal  authority,  concentrating  it  in  the 
hands  of  one  alone  ;  and  how  it  could  have  been  imagined 
that  princes  would  lower  their  sovereignty  bet*jre  the  su- 
premacy of  the  C^ourt  of  Home. 

Lastly,  concluding,  from  all  tliat  has  been  set  forth,  that 
political  and  not  rehgious  interests  ar  leing  discussed  m 
the  Council,  Count  Daru  demands  tL  lie  Governments 
be  heard,  or  at  least  admitted  to  1)  ostimony  to  tho 
characters,  dispositions,  ani        >mt  (di.  ^lusizioni  di  spirito) 


APPENDIX. 


183 


com- 
"  tlie 
^posit 

)ciety 
foi'o 

icial, 
fuU 

ver." 

uces 


of  the  people  tliey  represent ;  and  in  particular  that  since 
France,  by  reason  of  the  special  protection  which  for 
twenty  years  she  has  exercised  over  the  Pontifical  State, 
has  quite  special  duties  to  perform,  he  demands  that  the 
Goverament  of  that  nation  be  pei'mitted  to  exercise  its 
right  of  receiving  communication  of  projected  decisions 
touching"  pohtics,  and  of  requesting  the  delay  necessary 
for  bringing  its  oljservations  before  the  Council,  before  any 
resolution  be  adopted  by  the  same. 

This  is  an  abstract  of  the  dispatch  communicated  to  me 
by  the  jMarquis  de  Ixinneville.  I  have  thought  proper  to 
inform  yoiu*  Lordship  of  it  ;  with  the  view,  moreover,  of 
communicating  to  you  some  short  considerations  which  I 
think  necessary  to  put  in  a  clearer  light  the  points  touched 
upon  by  the  minister,  and  to  I'eply  to  the  deductions  made 
by  him  with  respect  to  the  points  submitted  to  the  delib- 
ertutions  of  the  Council. 

And  first,  I  cannot  dispense  myself  fi'om  manifesting  to 
yow  Lordship  th(^  satisfaction  with  which  the  Holy  Father 
rec^ved  the  declaration  expressed  at  the  beginning  of 
<Coiu»fc  L*aru"s  despatch,  and  repeated  in  the  sequel,  of  the 
^bed  j«teiition  of  the  French  Goveninient  to  respect,  and 
eiMR6  W  be  respected,  in  any  event,  the  full  liberty  of  the 
CouBcil,  m  well  in  the  ^cussion  of  the  constitution  refer- 
»ed  *i»  as  -irf  all  others  which  shall  hereaft^T  come  to  be 
pvopewid  \^  -*iiinati<»n  of  the  venera»t)le  aHHembly. 

This  d0<Sarar^  i**ii  d(j<-  ^^'eat  honor  to  ♦Ja^t  <*ovem- 

WmBk  of  a-^CanS****-?  JtmtJwm,  m  considered  by  the  Holy  See 
:#i  tiae  natanl  4iPatM||v  -4  llmt  prote«s>tiou  wiuach,  for 

WHtm^tttrn'^tHtilf  Jtttt'  -  esiei>^8e>!l  towards  it; 

a  p»4iM68n  HiiA  Imk  t  i;4k3<i^  ty^-^.  ^^f^r-rtti  Climes  pubhc 
demoniitKiifiwKi  ^j»»^fi4,w^  ,.,  t),,  -  ^f  ^\>^  Supreme 
Pontiff,  wW  ^bmjw  ^      ._    moment, 

cannot  do  )t«m  &an       -^    -  ,  ^l"-!«*si*^  sUk  Jtti  i"  -po^f- 

tance. 

But,  coming  cIom**  to  the  Ml^0f  4f  Coflli^aru's  de- 


1 84 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


't  ; 


I 


spatch,  I  must  say  franlily  that  I  am  quite  imable  to  un- 
derstaud  (non  mi  c  dato  di  comprondero)  how  the  declara- 
tions contained  in  the  draft  of  Constitution  on  the  Church, 
and  the  respeotive  canons — pubhshed  in  the  "  Angsbm-g 
Gazette  "  by  a  breach  of  the  Pontifical  secret — could  have 
produced  so  grave  and  profound  an  impression  on  the 
mind  of  tlie  French  Cabinet,  as  to  induce  it  to  change  the 
line  of  conduct  which  it  had  properly  traced  out  for  itself 
in  regard  to  the  discussions  of  the  Vatican  Council.  The 
subjects  treated  in  that  di'aft  of  constitution,  and  in  the 
canons  appertaining  to  it,  whatever  moditication  they  may 
undergo  in  the  sequel  from  the  judgment  and  decision  of 
the  Episcopate,  lU'c  no  more  than  the  exposition  of  the 
maxims  and  fundamental  principles  of  tlie  Chia'ch  ;  prin- 
ciples repeated  over  and  over  again  in  the  Acts  of  former 
Generiil  Councils,  proclaijiied  and  developed  in  several 
Pontifical  Constitutions,  published  in  all  Catliolic  states, 
and  pariicularly  in  the  ccLbratod  dogmatic  Hulls  beginning 
"  Unigonitus,"  and  "  Auctorem  Fidei,"  where  all  the  afore- 
said doctiinea  are  generally  confirmed  and  sanctioned ; 
principles,  finally,  which  have  constantly  fonncd  the  basis 
of  teaching  in  all  periods  of  the  Church,  and  in  all  Catholic 
schools,  and  have  been  defended  l)y  an  innumerable  host 
of  ecclesiastical  writers,  whose  works  have  served  for  text 
in  pubhc  schools  and  colleges,  as  well  Government  schools 
as  others,  without  any  contradiction  on  the  part  of  the 
civil  authority,  but  rather,  tor  the  most  part,  with  the  ap- 
probation and  encoiu'agement  of  the  same. 

Much  less  would  it  be  possible  for  me  to  agi'ee  upon  the 
character  and  extent  given  by  the  minister  to  the  doctruiea 
contained  in  the  aforesaid  canon.  In  virtue  of  them  there 
is  not  attributed,  either  to  the  Chm'ch  or  the  Roman  Pon- 
tifi",  that  direct  and  absolute  power  over  the  whole  aggi-e- 
gate  of  political  rights,  of  which  the  despatch  speaks  ;  nor 
is  the  subordination  of  the  civil  to  the  religious  power  to 


APPENDIX. 


185 


be  understood  in  the  sense  set  fortl  by  him,  but  in  an- 
other order  of  quite  diiferent  bearing. 

And  in  truth  the  Church  has  never  intended,  nor  now 
intends,  to  exercise  any  direct  and  absolute  power  over  the 
poUtical  rights  of  the  State.  Having  received  from  God 
the  lofty  mission  of  guiding  men,  whether  individually  or 
as  congregated  in  society,  to  a  supernatural  end,  she  has 
by  that  very  fact  the  authority  and  the  duty  to  judge  con- 
cerning the  morality  and  justice  of  all  acts,  internal  and 
external,  in  relation  to  their  conformity  with  the  natural 
aud  divine  law.  And  as  no  action,  Avhether  it  be  ordained 
by  a  supreme  power,  or  be  fi'eely  elicited  by  an  individual, 
can  be  exempt  from  this  character  of  morality  and  justice, 
so  it  happens  that  the  judgment  of  the  Church,  though 
falling  directly  on  the  morahty  of  the  acts,  indirectly 
reaches  over  everything  with  which  that  morality  is  con- 
joined. But  this  is  not  the  same  thing  as  to  interfere  di- 
•rcctly  m  political  affau's,  which,  by  the  order  established  by 
God  and  by  the  teaching  of  the  Church  herself,  appei-tains 
to  the  temporal  power  without  dependence  on  any  other 
authority.  The  subordination,  also,  of  the  civil  to  the 
religious  power  is  in  the  sense  of  the  pre-eminence  of  the 
sacerdotium  over  the  imperium,  because  of  the  superiority 
of  the  end  of  the  one  over  that  of  the  other.*  Hence,  the 
authority  of  the  imperium  depends  on  that  of  the  sacerdo- 
tium, as  human  things  on  divine,  temporal  on  spiritual. 
And  if  temporal  happiness,  which  is  the  end  of  the  civil 
power,  is  subordinate  to  eternal  beatitude,  which  is  the 
spuitual  end  of  the  sacerdotium,  it  follows  that  in  order  to 
reach  the  end  to  which  it  has  pleased  God  to  du'ect  them, 
the  one  power  is  subordinate  to  the  other.  Theii'  powers 
(I  say)  are  respectively  subordinate  in  the  same  way  as 
the  ends  to  which  they  are  dkected. 

*  Wc  have  no  exact  English  equivalent.s  for  tlie  abstract  terms— sac(?r- 


li. 


dozio,  impcro.     "  Saccrdozio  "  means  the  priestly  ollice,  und 
civil  authority  in  the  most  general  sense.— Noic  of  Tk.1 


'  impcro ' 


^, 


^Xa 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


1.1 


■50  *^™     H^H 

1^  1^   12.2 
MS.    ill  2.0 


us 


IIIII.25  11.4 


1.6 


yy 


/Q 


7 


•^' 


Riotographic 

Sciences 
Corporatioii 


4 


\ 


■A^^ 


■^ 


o 


^ 


33  WIST  MAIN  STRUT 

WMSTIR.N.Y.  MSIO 

(7U)  173-4503 


i 


II 


1  |:  i 

1   : 


r  . 


hfti 


1 86 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


•  It  results  from  these  principles  tliat,  if  the  infallibility 
of  the  Chnrch  extends  also  (not,  however,  in  the  sense  in- 
dicated by  the  French  despatch)  to  all  that  is  necessary  to 
preserve  intact  the  Deposit  of  Faith,  no  harm  is  thereby 
done  to  science,  history,  or  politics.  The  prerogative  of 
infallibility  is  not  an  unknown  fact  in  the  Catholic  world  ; 
the  snj)reme  magiderium  of  the  Church  has  dictated  in 
every  age  rules  of  faith,  without  the  internal  order  of 
States  being  thereby  affected  (risentirsone),  or  princes  be- 
ing disquieted  thereat  ;  rather,  wisely  appreciating  the  in- 
fluence v/hich  such  rules  have  on  the  good  order  of  civil 
society,  these  have  been  themselves,  from  time  to  time,  the 
vindicators  and  defenders  of  the  doctrines  defined,  and 
have  promoted,  by  the  concurrence  of  the  royal  power, 
their  full  and  respectful  observance. 

It  follows,  moreover,  that  if  the  Chiu'ch  was  instituted 
by  its  Divine  Founder  as  a  true  and  perfect  society,  dis- 
tinct from  the  civil  power  and  independent  of  it,  with  full 
authoritj'^  in  the  triple  order,  legislative,  judicial  and  coer- 
cive, no  confusion  springs  therefrom  in  the  march  of  human 
society,  and  in  the  exercise  of  the  rights  of  the  two  powers. 
The  competence  of  the  one  and  the  other  is  clearly  dis- 
tinct and  determined,  according  to  the  end  to  which  they 
are  respectively  directed.  The  Chiu'ch  does  not,  in  virtue 
of  her  authority,  intervene  directly  and  absolutely  m  the 
constitutive  [trinciples  of  governments,  in  the  forms  of 
civil  regulations,  in  the  political  rights  of  citizens,  in  the 
duties  of  the  State,  and  in  the  other  points  indicated  in  tho 
minister's  note.  But,  whereas  no  civil  society  can  sub- 
sist without  a  supreme  principle  regulating  the  morality 
of  its  acts  and  laws,  the  Church  lias  received  from  Cod 
this  lofty  mission,  which  tends  to  the  happiness  of  tho 
people,  while  she  in  no  way  enibavrasse.s,  by  the  exercise  of 
this  her  ministry,  tho  free  and  prompt  action  of  gcivern- 
monts.  She,  in  fact,  by  inculcating  the  princi[)le  of  render- 
ing to  God  that  which  is  God's,  and  to  Cwsar  that  which  m 


APPENDIX. 


187 


Ciesar's,  imposes  at  the  same  time  upon  her  children  the 
obligation  of  obeying  the  authority  of  princes  for  con- 
science sake.  But  these  should  also  recognize  that  if  any- 
where a  law  is  made  opposed  to  the  principles  of  eternal 
justice,  to  obey  would  not  be  a  giving  to  Caesar  that  which 
is  Ctcsar's,  but  a  taking  from  God  that  which  is  God's. 

I  proceed  now  to  say  a  word  on  the  profound  impres- 
sion wliich  the  minister  expects  will  be  made  throughout 
the  world  by  the  mere  enunciation  of  the  j)rinciples  devel- 
oped in  the  draft  of  constitution  which  forms  the  object 
of  his  despatch.  In  truth  it  is  not  easy  to  persuade  one- 
self how^  the  doctrines  contained  in  that  draft,  and  under- 
stood in  the  sense  above  pointed  out,  can  produce  the  pro- 
found impression  of  which  the  minister  speaks  ;  unless  m- 
deed  then*  spirit  and  character  be  wrested,  or  that  he 
speaks  of  those  who,  professing  principles  different  from 
those  professed  by  tlie  Catholic  Church,  cannot  of  course 
approve  of  such  principles  being  inculcated  and  sanctioned 
afresh.  I  say  afresh  ;  because  the  doctrines  contained  in 
that  document,  as  I  have  ah'eady  remarked,  far  from  being 
new  and  unheard  of,  embrace  no  more  (non  souo  nel  lore 
complesso)  than  the  reproduction  of  the  Catholic  teaching 
professed  in  every  age  and  in  every  Church,  as  will  be  sol- 
emnly proved  by  all  the  pastors  of  the  Cathohc  name, 
called  by  the  head  of  the  hierarchy  to  bear  authentic  Avit- 
ness,  in  the  midst  of  the  Council,  to  the  faith  and  tradi- 
tions of  the  Churcli  Universal.  It  is  to  bo  hoped  rather 
that  the  Catholic  doctrine,  once  more  solemnly  confirmed 
by  the  Fathers  of  the  Vatican  Council,  will  be  greeted  by 
the  faitliful  people  as  the  rainbow  of  peace  and  the  dawn 
of  a  brighter  future.  The  object  of  confirming  those  doc- 
trines is  no  (jther  than  to  recall  to  modern  society  the 
maxims  of  justice  and  virtue,  and  thus  to  restore  to  the 
world  that  peace  and  prosperity  which  can  only  bo  fonml 
in  the  perfect  keeping  of  the  divine  law.  This  is  the  firm 
hope  of  all  honest  men,  who  received  with  joy  the  an- 


1 88 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


■H 


'\ 


nouncement  of  the  Council ;  this  is  the  conviction  of  the 
Fathers  of  the  Church,  who  have  assembled  with  alacrity 
in  such  numbers  at  the  voice  of  the  Chief  Pastor ;  this  is 
the  prayer  which  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ  is  always  send- 
ing up  to  God  in  the  midst  of  the  grievous  troubles  which 
surround  his  Pontificate. 

For  the  rest,  I  do  not  understand  why  the  bishops  should 
have  to  renounce  their  episcopal  authority  in  consequence 
of  the  definition  of  Pontifical  authority.  This  prerogative 
is  not  only  as  ancient  as  the  Church  herself,  but  has  been, 
moreover,  always  exercised  in  the  Roman  Church,  without 
the  divine  authority  and  the  rights  conferred  by  God  on 
the  pastors  of  the  Church  being  thereby  altered  in  the  least 
degree.  Its  definition  therefore  would  in  no  way  go  to 
change  the  relations  between  the  bishops  and  tlieu'  head. 
The  rights  of  the  one  and  the  prerogatives  of  the  other 
are  well  defined  in  the  Chm'ch's  divine  constitution ;  and 
the  confirmation  of  the  Roman  Pontiff's  supreme  autliority 
and  magisterium,  far  from  being  prejudicial  to  the  riglits 
of  bishops,  will  fiu'nish  a  new  support  to  then*  authority 
and  magisterium,  since  the  strength  and  vigor  of  the  mem- 
bers is  just  so  much  as  comes  to  them  from  the  head. 

By  parity  of  reason — the  authority  of  the  pastors  of  the 
Church  being  strengthened  anew  by  the  solemn  confirma- 
tion of  Pontifical  Infallibility — that  of  princes,  especially 
Catholic  prmces,  will  be  no  less  strengthened.  The  pros- 
perity of  the  Church  and  the  peace  of  the  State  depend 
upon  the  close  and  intimate  union  of  the  two  supremo 
powers.  Wlio  does  not  see  then  that  the  autliority  of 
prmces  not  only  will  not  receive  any  blow  from  the  pontifi- 
cal supremacy,  but  will  instead  find  therem  its  strongest 
support  ?  As  sons  of  the  Chui'ch  they  owe  obedience,  re- 
spect, and  protection  to  the  authority  placed  on  earth  by 
God  to  guide  princes  and  peoples  to  the  last  end  of  eternal 
salvation ;  nor  can  they  refuse  to  recognize  that  royal 
power  has  boon  granted  them  for  the  defence  also  and 


APPENDIX. 


189 


L  of  the 
alacrity 
this  is 
lys  send- 
s  which 

)s  should 
eqneuee 
ogative 
as  been, 
without 
Grod  on 
the  least 

•y  go  to 

iir  head, 
le  other 
on ;  and 
iitliority 
e  rig]  its 
nthorifcy 
le  niem- 
ad. 

s  of  tlio 
•nfirnia- 
peeially 
le  pros- 
dqicnd 
iprenio 
^ity  of 
pen  till- 
ong-est 
ice,  re- 
rth  by 
itcrnal 
royal 
io  and 


guardianship  of  Christian  society.  But  by  the  very  fact  of 
the  prmciple  of  authority  receiving  new  vigor  in  the 
Church  and  in  its  head,  the  sovereign  power  must  necessa- 
rily receive  a  new  impulse,  since  it  has  from  God  a  common 
origin,  and  consequently  common  interests  also.  And  so, 
if  the  wickedness  of  the  age,  by  separating  the  one  from 
the  other,  has  placed  both  in  troublesome  and  painful  con- 
ditions, to  the  great  injury  of  human  society,  closer  rela- 
tions ^vill  unite  both  in  indissoluble  bonds  for  the  defence 
of  the  grand  interests  of  religion  and  society,  and  will  pre- 
pare for  them  the  way  to  a  brighter  and  more  prosperous 
future. 

From  what  has  been  said  up  to  this  point  it  results 
clearly  that  the  Council  has  not  been  called  to  discuss 
political  interests,  as  the  despatch  of  Count  Daru  seems 
to  indicate.  We  may  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  French 
Government,  findmg  no  longer  a  sufficient  reason  for  depart- 
ing from  the  line  of  conduct  it  had  set  itself  to  follow  in 
respect  of  the  Council,  will  not  desire  to  insist  on  the 
request  for  communication  of  the  Decrees  wliicli  will  be 
submitted  to  the  examination  and  discussion  of  the  vener- 
able assembly  of  Bishops.  On  which  point  indeed  it  occurs 
to  me  to  observe  that  the  right  claimed  for  this  puirpose  by 
the  minister  on  the  ground  of  the  Concordat  in  force  be- 
tween the  Holy  See  and  France,  cannot,  in  my  opinion, 
find  any  support  in  that  act.  In  the  first  place,  no  special 
mention  of  this  particular  point  is  found  in  the  articles  of 
that  convention.  Then,  further,  the  relations  of  Church 
and  State  on  points  belonging  to  both  Powers  (pmito  di 
mista  conipetenza)  having  been  regulated  by  the  Concordat, 
the  decisions,  which  may  be  come  to  by  the  Vatican  Coun- 
cil on  such  matters  will  in  no  way  alter  the  special  stipula- 
tions made  by  the  Holy  See,  as  well  ^vith  Franco  as  wit,Ii 
other  governments,  as  long  as  these  place  no  obstaclijs  iu 
the  way  of  the  full  keeping  of  tlie  conditions  agreed  upon. 
I  may  also  add  that  if  the  Holy  See  has  not  thought  fit  to 


190 


THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


1 

I 


invite  Catliolic  princes  to  the  Council,  as  it  did  on  other 
occasions,  every  one  will  easily  understand  that  this  is 
chiefly  to  be  attributed  to  the  changed  circumstances  of 
the  times.  The  altered  state  of  the  relations  between 
the  Church  and  the  Civil  Governments  has  made  more 
difllcult  their  mutual  action  in  the  regulation  of  things 
religious. 

I  desire  however  to  hope  that  the  Government  of  his 
Majesty  the  Emperor,  fully  satisfied  with  the  explanations 
given  by  me  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  See  to  the  various 
points  of  Count  Daru's  despatch,  and  recognizing  at  the 
same  time  the  difficulties  in  which  the  Holy  Father  might 
find  himself,  will  not  insist  further  on  the  demand  of  com- 
munication beforehand  of  the  drafts  of  constitutions  to  bo 
examined  by  the  Fathers  of  the  Council.  Were  such 
demand  conceded,  there  would  be  question  of  things  tend- 
ing to  embarrass  the  fi-ee  action  of  the  Coimcil.  Moreover, 
since  the  Church  is  keeping  within  the  limits  assigned  to 
her  by  her  Divine  Founder,  no  anxiety  need  remain  to  the 
Government  of  his  Majesty  on  account  of  the  deliberations 
which  may  come  to  be  adopted  by  the  Ejiiscopal  assembly. 
Finally  the  French  Government  will  thus  give,  by  the  very- 
fact,  a  new  proof  of  those  dispositions  of  good  will  which 
it  has  manifested  m  respect  of  the  full  liberty  of  the  Con- 
ciliar  deliberations,  and  of  the  confidence  wliich  it  declares 
it  reposes  in  the  wisdom  and  prudence  of  the  Apostohc 
See. 

Your  Lordship  will  please  read  this  des]3atch  to  Count 
Bjiru,  as  also  leave  him  a  copy. 

Meanwhile  receive,  &c.,  &c., 

(Signed)        G,  Card.  Antonelli. 


APPENDIX. 


191 


tilings 


HL 


ACT  OP  CONDEMNATION  BY  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CERTAIN 

PAMPHLETS,  &c. 

Revebendissimi  Patres, — Ex  quo  Sacrosancta  Synodus 
Vaticaiia,  opitulante  Deo,  congregata  est,  acerrimum 
statiin  contra  earn  belliim  exarsit ;  atque  ad  venerandam, 
eius  auctoritatem  penes  fidelcm  populum  imminuendam, 
ac  si  fieri  posset,  j)enitus  labefactandam,  contumeliose  de 
iUa  detrabere,  eamque  putidissiinis  calumniis  oppetere 
plui'es  scriptores  certatim  aggressi  sunt  non  modo  inter 
betcrodoxos  et  apertos  Crucis  Cbristi  inimicos,  sed  etiam 
inter  eos  qui  Catbolicae  Ecclesiae  filios  scso  dictitant,  et 
quod  maxime  dolendum  est  inter  ipsos  eius  saeros  minis- 
tros. 

Quae  in  publicis  cuiusque  idiomatis  epbemeridibus,  quae- 
que  in  libellis  absque  auctovis  nomine  passim  editis  et  fur- 
tive distributis,  congcsta  hac  do  re  fuerint  probrosa  men- 
dacia,  omncs  apprime  norunt,  quin  nobis  necesse  sit  ilia 
siugillatim  edicere.  Yorum  inttT  anonymos  istiusmodi 
libellos  duo  praosortim  extant,  gallico  conscripti  sub  titulis: 
Ce  qui  sc  ^x^s.sv!  an  Concile  et  Li,  derniere  heure  dii  Concilc, 
qui  ob  suam  calumniandi  artem,  obtrectandique  licentiam 
ceteris  palmam  praeripuisf-,e  vidontur.  In  bis  enim  nedum 
hiiius  Concilii  dignitas  ao  plena  libertas  turpissiniis  op- 
pugiiantur  mendaciis,  iuraque  Apostolicae  Sedis  evertuiitm'; 
sed  ipsa  quociue  SSmi  Dfii  Nostri  augusta  persona  gravibus 
lacessitur  iniuriis.  lam  vcro  Nos  officii  nostri  memores, 
ne  silentium  nostrum,  si  diutius  protraheretur,  sinistro  a 
malcvolis  liomiuibus  uiterpretari  valeat,  contra  tot  tantaa- 


192 


THE   VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


que  obtrectationes  vocem  extollere  cogimur,  atque  in  con- 
spectu  omnium  vestrum,  Emi  Patres,  protestari  ac  de- 
clarare  :  falsa  omnino  esse  et  calumniosa  quaecumque  in 
praedictis  ephemeriuibus  et  libellis  effutiuntur,  sive  in 
spretum  et  contumeliam  SSmi  Dili  Nostri  et  Apostolicae 
Sedis,  sive  in  dedecus  huius  Sacrosanctae  Synodi,  et  contra 
assertum  defectum  in  ilia  legitimae  libertatis. 

Datum  ex  Aula  Concilii  Yaticani,  die  16  lulii  1870. 

PiiiLippus  Card.  De  Angelis  Praeses. 
Antoninus  Card.  De  LiJca  Praeses. 
Andreas  Card.  Bizzariu  praeses. 
Aloysius  Card.  Belio  Praeses. 
Hannibal  Card.  Capalti  Praeses. 

losEPHus  Ep.  S.  Hippolyti,  Secretarius. 


IV. 


TEXT   OF  THE  CONSTITUTIONS. 


CONSTITUTIO  DOGMATICA  DE   FIDE   CATHOLICA. 


pros   EPISCOPUS,  SEEVUS   SERV0RUI\I   DEI,  SACRO    APPROBANTE   CON- 
CILIO,   AD   PERPETUAM   REI   LIEMORIAM. 

Dei  rilius  et  generis  huinani  liedemptor  Dominus  Noster 
Jesus  Christus,  ad  Patrem  ccjclestcm  rcditiu'us,  cum  Ecclcsia 
sua  in  terris  militanto,  oinnibns  diebus  usque  ad  coiismn- 
mationem  soeculi  futurum  se  esse  promisit.     Quare  dilectse 


APPENDIX. 


193 


in  con- 
i  ac  de- 
tnque  in 

sive  in 
3stolicae 
t  contra 

70. 


anus. 


.ICA. 

rE   CON- 

Noster 
Icclesiii 
)usuin- 
lilectse 


Sponsae  praesto  esse,  adsistere  docenti,  operanti  benedicere, 
pcriclitanti  opem  ferre  nullo  unquam  tempore  destitit. 
HiTec  vero  salutaris  ejus  providentia,  cum  ex  aliis  beneficiis 
innumeris  continenter  appamit,  turn  iis  manifestissime 
comperta  est  fmctibus,  qui  orbi  christiano  e  Conciliis 
oecumenicis  ac  nominatim  e  Tridentino,  iniquis  licet  tem- 
poribus  celebrate,  amplissimi  provenerunt.  Hinc  enim 
sanctissima  religionis  dogmata  pressius  definita,  uberiusque 
exposita,  errores  damnati  atque  cohibiti ;  hinc  ecclesiastica 
disciplina  restituta  finniusque  sancita,  promotum  in  Clero 
scientise  et  pietatis  studium,  parata  adolescentibus  ad 
sacram  militiam  educandis  collegia,  christiani  denique 
popjli  mores  et  accuratiore  fideUum  eruditione  et  frequen- 
tiore  sacramentorum  usu  instaurati.  Hinc  prseterea  arctior 
membrorum  cum  visibili  capite  communio,  universoque 
corpori  Christi  mystico  additus  vigor  ;  bine  religiosie  mul- 
tiplicataj  familire,  aliaque  christians;  pietatis  instituta,  hinc 
ille  etiam  assiduus  et  usque  ad  sanguinis  effusionem  con- 
stans  ardor  in  Christi  regno  late  per  orbem  propagando. 

VciTmitamen  ha3c  ahaque  insignia  emolumenta,  qua3  per 
iiltimam  maxime  OGcumenicam  SjTiodum  divina  clementiA, 
Ecclesiae  largita  est,  dum  grato,  quo  par  est,  animo  recoli- 
raus,  acerbum  compescere  baud  possumus  dolorem  ob  mala 
gravissima,  inde  potissimum  orta,  quod  ejusdem  sacro- 
sanctee  Synodi  apud  permultos  vel  auctoritas  contempta, 
vel  sapientissiraa  neglecta  fuere  decreta. 

Nemo  enim  ignorat  hsereses  quas  Tridentini  Patres  pro- 
scripserunt,  dum,  rejecto  divino  Ecclesias  magisterio,  res  ad 
rehgionem  spectantes  privati  cujusvis  judicio  permitteren- 
tur,  in  sectas  paulatim  dissolutas  esse  multiphces,  quibus 
inter  se  dissentientibus  et  concertantibus,  omnis  tandem  in 
Christum  fides  apud  uon  paucos  labefacta  est.  Itaque  ipsa 
sacra  Biblia,  qua;  antea  Christiana)  doctrina)  unicus  fons  et 
judex  asserebantur,  jam  non  pro  divinis  haberi,  imo 
mythicis  commentis  acceneeri  coeperunt. 

Turn  uata  est  et  late  nimis  per  orbem  vagata  ilia  ration- 

9 


194 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


alismi  seu  naturalismi  doctriua,  quso  religioni  christianaa 
Titpote  supematurali  instituto  per  omnia  aclversans,  summo 
studio  molitur,  ut  Christo,  qui  solus  Dominus  et  Salvator 
noster  est,  a  mentibus  bumanis,  a  vita  et  moribus  populor- 
mn  excluso,  merse  quod  vocant  rationis  vel  natui'SG  regnum 
stabiliatur.  Eelicta  autem  projectjique  cbristiana  rebgione, 
negato  vero  Deo  et  Cbristo  ejus,  prolapsa  tandem  est  mul- 
torem  mens  in  pantbeismi  materiabsmi  atbeismi  baratbrum, 
ut  jam  ipsam  rationalem  naturam,  omnemque  justi  rectique 
normam  negantes,  ima  bumanse  societatis  fundamenta  di- 
ruere  connitantur. 

Hac  porro  impietate  circumquaque  gra.  sante,  infebciter 
contigit,  ut  plm'es  etiam  e  catbobcse  Ecclesice  fibis  a  via 
vera)  pietatis  aberrarent,  in  iisque,  diminutis  paullatim  veri- 
tatibus,  sensus  catbobcus  attenuaretur.  Variis  enim  ac 
peregrinis  doctrinis  abducti,  natui'am  et  gratiam,  scientiam 
bumanam  et  fidem  divinam  perperum  commiscentes,  genui- 
num  sensum  dogmatum,  quem  tenet  ac  docet  Sancta  Mater 
Ecelesia,  depravare,  integritatemque  et  sinceritatem  fidei  in 
periculum  adducere  comperiuntur. 

Quibus  omnibus  perspectis,  fieri  qui  potest,  ut  non  com- 
moveantur  intuna  Ecelesia)  viscera  ?  Quemadmodum  enim 
Deus  vult  omnes  bomines  salvos  fieri,  et  ad  agnitionem 
veritatis  venu'e  ;  quemadmodum  Cbristus  venit,  ut  salvum 
faceret,  quod  perierat,  et  filios  Dei,  qui  erant  dispersi,  con- 
gregaret  in  unum  :  ita  Ecelesia,  a  Deo  populorum  mater 
et  magistra  constituta,  omnibus  debitricem  se  novit,  ac 
lapsos  erigere,  labantes  sustinere,  revertentes  amplecti,  con- 
firmare  bonos  et  ad  mebora  provebere  parata  semper  et  in- 
tenta  est.  Quapropter  nullo  tempore  a  Dei  veritate,  qusB 
sanat  omnia,  testanda  et  prajdicanda  quiescere  potest,  sibi 
dictum  esse  non  ignorans :  "  Spiritus  mens,  qui  est  in  te, 
et  verba  mea  qua;  posui  in  ore  tuo,  non  recedent  de  ore  tuo 
amodo  et  usque  in  sempiternum."  * 


*  Isal.  lis.  31. 


APPENDIX. 


195 


uistianoB 
!,  summo 
Salvator 
populor- 
regnum 
eligione, 
est  mul- 
'athrum, 
rectique 
lenta  cU- 

afeliciter 
lis  a  via 
tim  veri- 
enim  ac 
jientiam 
3,  genui- 
la  Mater 
fidei  in 

on  com- 
m  enim 
itionem 
salvum 
•si,  con- 
L  mater 
3vit,  ac 
3ti,  con- 
jr  et  in- 
te,  quas 
!st,  sibi 
b  in  te, 
Dre  tuo 


Nos  itaque,  inhserentes  Prsedecessorum  Nostrorum  vesti- 
giis,  pro  supremo  Nostro  Apostolico  munere  veiitatem 
catholicam  docere  ac  tiieri,  perversasque  doctrinas  repro- 
bare  nunqiiam  intermissimus.  Nunc  autem  sedentibus 
Nobiscum  et  judicantibus  universi  orbis  Episcopis,  in  banc 
cecumenicam  Synodum  auctoritate  Nostra  in  Spiritu  Sancto 
congregatis,  innixi  Dei  verbo  scripto  et  tradito,  prout  ab 
Ecclesia  catbolica  sancte  custoditum  et  genuine  expositum 
accepimus,  ex  hac  Petri  Cathedra  in  conspcctu  omnium 
salutarem  Christi  doctrinam  profiteri  et  declarare  consti- 
tuimus,  adversis  erroribus  potestate  nobis  a  Deo  tradita 
proscriptis  atque  damnatis. 


CAPUT  I. 

DE  DEO   RERUM   OMNTOM  CEEATOBE. 

Sancta  Catbolica  Apostolica  Romana  Ecclesia  credit  et 
confitetur,  unum  esse  Deum  verum  et  vivum,  Creatorem  ac 
Dominum  cceli  et  terras,  omnipotentem,  setemimi,  immen- 
Bum  inoomprehensibilem,  intellectu  ac  voluntate  omnique 
perfectione  infinitum  ;  qui  cum  sit  una  singularis,  simplex 
omnino  et  incommutabilis  substantia  spiritualis,  prsedican- 
dus  est  re  et  essentia,  a  mundo  distinctus,  in  se  et  ex  se 
beatissimus,  et  super  omnia,  quse  prseter  ipsum  sunt  et 
conoipi  possunt,  ineffabiliter  excelsus. 

Hie  solus  verus  Deus  bonitate  sua  et  omnipotenti  virtute 
non  ad  augendam  suam  beatitudinem,  nee  ad  acquii'endam, 
sed  ad  raanifestandam  perfectionem  suam  per  bona,  quae 
creaturis  impeiiitur,  liberrimo  consilio  simul  ab  initio  tern- 
poris  utramque  de  niliilo  condidit  creaturam,  spiritualem 
et  corporalem,  augelicam  videlicet  et  muudauam,  ac  deinde 


I 


!/■ 


Hi 


I 


196 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


humanam  quasi  commimein  ex  spiritu  et  corpore  constitu- 
tam.* 

Universa  vcro,  qiiee  condidit,  Deus  providentia  sua  tuetiir 
atque  gubemat,  attingens  a  fine  usque  ad  finem  fortiter,  et 
disponens  omnia  suaviter.f  Omnia  enim  nuda  et  aperta 
sunt  oculis  ejus,|  ea  etiam,  quse  libera  creaturarum  actions 
futura  sunt. 


CAPUT  n. 


DE   REVELATIONB. 


Eadem  sancta  Mater  Ecclesia  tenet  et  docet,  Deum, 
rerum  omnium  principium  et  finem,  naturali  humanse 
rationis  lumine  e  rebus  creatis  eerto  cognosci  posse  ;  in- 
visibilia  enim  ipsius,  a  creatura  mundi,  per  ea  quae  facta 
sunt,  intellecta,  conspiciuntur  5  altamen  placuisse  ejus 
sapientise  et  bonitati,  alia,  eaque  supematurali  via  se  ipsum 
ac  seterna  voluntatis  suse  decreta  hmnano  generi  revelare, 
dicente  Apostolo  :  "  Multifariam,  multisque  modis  olim 
Deus  loquens  patribus  in  Prophetis  :  novissime,  diebus 
istis  locutus  est  nobis  in  Filio."  || 

Huic  divinse  revelationi  tribuendum  quidem  est,  ut  ea, 
quae  in  rebus  divinis  humanse  rationi  per  se  impervia  non 
Bunt,  in  praesenti  quoque  generis  humani  conditione  ab 
omnibus  expedite,  firma  certitudine  et  nullo  admixto  errore 
cognosci  possint.  Non  hac  tamen  de  causa  revelatio  abso- 
lute necessaria  dicenda  est,  sed  quia  Deus  ex  infinita  boni- 
tate  sua  ordinavit  hominem  ad  finem  supematuralem,  ad 
participanda  scilicet  bona  divina,  quae  humanae  mentis  in- 

*  Concil.  Latcran.  IV.  cap.  i.  Dc  flde  Catholica. 
+  Sap.  viii.  1.  X  Cf.  Hebr.  iv.  13. 

§  Rom.  i.  20.  I  Hebr.  i.  1,  2. 


APPENDIX. 


197 


constitu- 

ua  tuetiir 
)rtiter,  et 
et  aperta 
a  actione 


'<,  Deiim, 
humanaa 
osse  ;  in- 
u£e  facta 
isse  ejus 
se  ipsum 
revelare, 
dis  olim 
s,  diebus 

it,  ut  ea, 
rvia  non 
tione  ab 
o  errore 
tio  abso- 
ita  boni- 
ilem,  ad 
!ntis  in- 


telligentiam  omnino  superant ;  siquidem  oculus  non  vidit, 
nee  amis  audivit,  nee  in  cor  hominis  ascendit,  quse  prsepa- 
ravit  Deus  iis,  qui  diligunt  ilium.* 

Hsec  porro  supematuralis  revelatio,  secundum  universalis 
Ecclesise  fidem,  a  sancta  Tridentina  Synodo  declaratam, 
continefcur  in  libris  scriptis  et  sine  scripto  traditionibus, 
quse  ipsius  Cliristi  ore  ab  Apostolis  acceptse,  aut  ab  ipsis 
Apostolis  Spiritu  Sancto  dictante  quasi  per  manus  traditae, 
ad  nos  usque  pervenenmt.f  Qui  quidem  veteris  et  novi 
Testamenti  libri  integri  cum  omnibus  suis  partibus,  prout 
in  ejusdem  Concilii  decreto  recensentur,  et  in  veteri  vulgata 
latina  editione  habentur,  pro  sacris  et  canonicis  suscipiendi 
sunt.  Eos  vero  Ecclesia  pro  sacris  et  canonicis  habet,  non 
ideo  quod  sola  humana  industria  concinnati,  sua  demde 
auctoritate  sint  approbati ;  nee  ideo  dumtaxat,  quod  reve- 
lationem  sine  errore  contineant;  sed  propterea  quod  Spiritu 
Sancto  inspirante  conscripti  Deum  habent  auctorem,  atque 
ut  tales  ipsi  Ecclesise  traditi  sunt. 

Quoniam  vero,  quse  sancta  Tridentina  Synodus  de  inter- 
pretatione  divinse  Scripturse  ad  coercenda  petulantia  ingenia 
salubriter  decrevit,  a  quibusdam  hominibus  prave  expon- 
untm*,  Nos,  idem  decretum  renovantes,  banc  illius  mentem 
esse  declaramus,  ut  in  rebus  fidei  et  morum,  ad  sedification- 
em  doctrinse  Cbristianse,  pertinentium,  is  pro  vero  sensu 
sacrse  Scripturse  habendus  sit,  quem  tenuit  ac  tenet  Sancta 
Mater  Ecclesia,  cujus  est  judicare  de  vero  sensu  et  inter- 
pretatione  Scripturarum  sanctarum  ;  atque  ideo  nemini 
licere  contra  hunc  sensum,  aut  etiam  contra  unanimem 
consensum  Patrum  ipsam  Scripturam  sacram  interpretari. 

*  1  Cor.  u.  9. 
t  ConcU.  Trid.  Sess.  IV.  de  Can.  Script. 


! 


'■'M'.   ^L 


|,t     •■(•'    r" 


ii 


193 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


CAPUT  in. 


DE  FIDE. 


Quura  homo  a  Deo  tanquam  Creatore  et  Domino  suo 
totus  dependeat,  et  ratio  creata  increatse  Veritati  penitus 
Bubjecta  sit,  plenum  revelanti  Deo  intellectiis  et  voluntatis 
obsequium  fide  prsestare  tenemur.  Hanc  vero  fidem,  quse 
humanae  salutis  initium  est,  Ecclesia  catholica  profitetur, 
virtutem  osse  supematuralem,  qua,  Dei  aspirante  et  adju- 
vante  gratia,  ab  eo  revelata  vera  esse  credimus,  non  propter 
intrinsecam  rerum  veritatem  naturali  rationis  lumine  per- 
spectam,  sed  propter  auctcritatem  ipsius  Dei  revelantis, 
qui  nee  falli  nee  fallere  potest.  Est  enim  fides,  testante 
Apostolo,  sperandarum  substantia  rerum,  argumentum  non 
apparentium.* 

Ut  nihilominus  fidei  nostras  obsequium  rationi  consen- 
taneum  esset,  voluit  Deus  cum  internis  Spiritus  Sancti 
auxiliis  externa  jungi  revelationis  sua3  argumenta,  facta 
scilicet  divina,  atque  imprimis  miracula  et  prophetias,  quoe 
cum  Dei  omnipotentiam  et  infinitam  scientiam  luculenter 
commonstrent,  divinse  revelationis  signa  sunt  certissima  et 
omnium  intelligentiee  accommodata.  Quare  tum  Moyses 
et  Prophetse,  tum  ipse  maxime  Christus  Dominus  multa  et 
manifestissima  miracula  et  prophetias  ediderunt,  et  de 
Apostolis  legimus  :  "  Uli  autem  profecti  prajdicaverunt 
ubique.  Domino  cooperante,  et  sermonem  confiimante, 
eequentibus  signis. "  f  Et  rursum  scriptum  est:  "  Habemus 
firmiorem  propheticum  sermonem,  cui  bene  facitis  atten- 
dentes  quasi  lucemce  luccnti  in  caliginoso  loco."  | 

Licet  autem  fidei  assensus  nequaquam  sit  motus  animi 
csBcus  :  nemo  tamen  evangelica)   prrodicationi  consentii'Q 

*  Hebr.  xi.  1.  t  Marc.  xvl.  20. 

t  2  Potr.  1.  19. 


I 


APPENDIX. 


199 


tnmo  suo 
penitiis 
oluntatis 
em,  qu8B 

ofitetur, 

et  adju- 

propter 

line  per- 

Jvelantis, 

testante 

turn  non 

consen- 
s  Sancti 
fca,  facta 
ias,  quae 
culenter 
ssima  et 
Moyses 
nulta  et 
,   et  de 
averuut 
miante, 
J-bemus 
I  atteii- 

animi 
sentii'Q 


potest,  sicut  oportet  ad  salutem  consequendam,  absque 
illuminatione  et  inspiratione  Spiritus  Sancti,  qui  dat  omni- 
bus suavitatem  in  consentiendo  et  credendo  veritati.*  Quare 
fides  ipsa  in  se,  etiamsi  per  charitatem  non  operetur,  donum 
Dei  est,  et  actus  ejus  est  opus  ad  salutem  pertinens,  quo 
homo  liberam  praestat  ipsi  Deo  obedientiam  gratiae  ejus,  cui 
resistere  posset,  consentiendo  et  cooperando. 

Porro  fide  divina  et  catholica  ea  omnia  credenda  sunt, 
qua)  in  verbo  Dei  scripto  vel  tradito  continentur,  et  ab  Ec- 
clesia  sive  solemni  judicio  sive  ordinario  et  universali 
magisterio  tamquam  divinitus  revelata  credenda  proponun- 
tur. 

Quoniam  vero  sine  fide  impossibile  est  placere  Deo.  et  ad 
filiorum  ejus  consortium  pervenire ;  ideo  nemini  unquam 
sine  ilia  contigit  justificatio,  nee  uUus,  nisi  in  ea  persevera- 
verit  usque  in  finem,  vitam  ffiternam  assequetur.  Ut  autem 
ofiicio  veram  fidem  amplectendi,  in  eaque  constanter  per- 
severandi  satisfacere  possemus,  Deus  per  FiHum  suum 
unigenitum  Ecclesiam  instituit,  suwque  institutionis  mani- 
festis  notis  instruxit,  ut  ea  tamquam  custos  et  magistra 
verbi  revelati  ab  omnibus  pc^set  agnosci.  Ad  solam  enim 
catliolicam  Ecclesiam  ea  pertinent  omnia,  quas  ad  evidentem 
fidei  christiansc  credibiliiatem  tam  multa  et  tarn  mira  divi- 
nitus sunt  disposita.  Quin  etiam  Ecclesia  per  se  ipsa,  ob 
suara  nempe  admirabilem  propagationem,  eximiam  sancti- 
tatcm  et  inexhaustam  in  omnibus  bonis  fcecunditatem,  ob 
catliolicam  unitatem,  invictamque  stabilitatem,  magnum 
quoddam  et  perpetuum  est  motivum  credibilitatis  et  divinao 
sua)  legationis  testimonium  iiTefragabile. 

Quo  fit,  ut  ipsa  vcluti  sig-num  levatum  in  nationes,f  et  ad 
so  invitet,  qui  nondum  credidenmt,  et  filios  suos  certiores 
faciat,  firmissimo  iiiti  fundamento  fidem,  quam  profitcntur. 
Cui  quidem  testinioiiio  efficax  subsidium  accedit  ex  superna 
virtuto.     Etcnim  bcnignissimus  Dominus  ct  errautes  gratiil 


*  Sj'n.  Armifl.  II.  can.  7. 


t  Itsai.  xi.  13. 


200 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


sua  excitat  atque  acljuvat,  ut  ad  agnitionem  veritatis  venu*e 
possint ;  et  eos,  quos  de  tenebris  traustulifc  in  admirabile 
lumen  suum,  in  hoc  eodem  lumine  ut  perseverent,  gratia 
sua  confirmat,  non  deserens,  nisi  deseratur.  Quocii-ca 
minime  par  est  conditio  eorum,  qui  per  coeleste  fidei  donuni 
catholicae  veritati  adhfleserunt,  atque  eorum,  qui  ducti  opi- 
nionibns  humanis,  falsam  religionem  sectantur ;  illi  enim, 
qui  fidem  sub  Ecclesiaj  magisterio  susceperunt,  nullam 
unquam  habere  possunt  justam  causam  mutandi,  aut  in 
dubium  fidem  eamden  revocandi.  Quie  cum  ita  sint, 
gratias  agentes  Deo  Patri,  qui  dignos  nos  fecit  in  partem 
sortis  sanctorum  in  lumine,  tantam  ne  negligamus  salutem, 
sed  aspicientes  in  auctorem  fidei  et  consummatorem  Jesum, 
teneamus  spei  nostrsD  confe^sionem  indecHnabilem. 


CAPUT  IV. 


DE  FIDE  ET   RATIONE. 


Hoc  quoqne  perpetuus  Ecclesia)  catholica3  consensus 
tenuit  et  tenet,  duplicem  esse  ordinem  cognitionis,  non 
solum  principio,  sed  objecto  etiam  distinctum  :  principio 
quidem,  quia  in  altero  naturali  ratione,  in  aJtero  fide  divinA 
cognoscimus ;  objecto  outem,  quia  prajter  ea,  ad  quaj  na- 
turahs  ratio  pertingere  potest,  credenda  nobis  proponuntur 
mysteria  in  Deo  abscondita,  qua?,  nisi  revelata  divinitus,  in- 
notescere  non  possunt.  Quocirca  Apostolus,  qui  a  gentibus 
Deum  per  ea,  qua)  facta  sunt,  cognitimi  esse  testatm*,  dis- 
eerens  tamen  de  gratia  et  veritate,  qua)  per  Jesum  Christum 
facta  est,*  pronuntiat :  "  Loquimur  Dei  sapientiam  in 
mysterio,  quie  absconditr  est,  quam  prrodcstinavit  Dens 
ante  sajcula  in  gloriam  nostram,  quam  nemo  principum 

*  Joau.  1.  17. 


5? 

r 


APPENDIX. 


201 


venu'e 


hujus  saeculi  cognovit :  nobis  autem  revelavit  Deus  per 
Spiritum  suum :  Spiritus  enim  omnia  scrutatur,  etiam 
profunda  Dei.*  Et  ipse  Unigenitas  confitetur  Patri,  quia 
abscondit  hsec  a  sapientibus,  et  prudentibus,  et  revelavit  ea 
parvulis.f 

Ac  ratio  quidem,  fide  illustrata,  oum  sedulo,  pie  et  sobrie 
quaerit,  aliquam,  Deo  dante,  mysteriorum  intelligentiam 
eamque  fructuosissimam  assequitur,  turn  ex  eorum,  quoe 
naturaliter  cognoscit,  analogia,  turn  e  mysteriorum  ipsorum 
nexu  inter  se  et  cum  fine  hominis  ultimo;  numquam  tamen 
idonea  redditur  ad  ea  perspicienda  instar  veritatum,  quoe 
proprium  ipsius  objectum  constituunt.  Divina  enim 
mysteria  suapte  natui'a  intellectimi  creatum  sic  excedunt, 
ut  etiam  revelatione  tradita  et  fide  suscepta,  ipsius  tamen 
ildei  velamine  contecta  et  quadam  quasi  caligine  obvoluta 
maneant,  quamdiu  in  hac  mortali  vita  peregrinamur  a 
Domino:  per  fidem  enim  ambulamus,  et  non  per  speciem.| 

Verum  etsi  fides  sit  supra  rationem,  nulla  tamen  unquam 
inter  fidem  et  rationem  vera  dissensio  esse  potest ;  cum 
idem  Deus,  qui  mj^steria  revelat  et  fidem  infundit,  animo 
liumano  rationis  lumen  indiderit ;  Deus  autem  negare 
seipsum  non  possit,  nee  verum  vero  unquam  contradicere. 
Inanis  autem  hujus  contradictionis  species  inde  potissimum 
oritur,  quod  vel  fidei  dogmata  ad  mentem  Ecclesia)  intellecta 
et  exposita  non  fuerint,  vel  opinionum  commenta  pro  ra- 
tionis effatis  habeantur.  Omnem  igitur  assertionem  veritati 
illuminataj  fidei  contrariam  omnino  falsam  esse  defiuimus.§ 
Porro  Ecclesia,  quio  una  cum  apostolico  munere  docendi, 
mandatum  accepit,  fidei  depositum  custodiendi,  jus  etiam 
et  officium  divinitus  liabet  falsi  nominis  scientiam  proscri- 
bendi,  ne  quis  decipiatur  per  philosophiam,  et  inanem 
fallaciam.  ||  Quapropter  omnes  christiani  fideles  hujusmodi 
opiniones,  qua3  fidei  doctrinaj  contraria;  esse  cognoseuntur, 


*  1  Cor.  11.  7,  9.  +  Mtttth.  xl.  25. 

§  Coiicil.  Ltttcran.  V.  Bulla  Apostolici  regiminis. 


X  2  Coi'.  V.  7. 

B  Coloss.  11.  8. 


202 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


isi:; 


maxime  si  ab  Ecclesia  reprobatce  fueriut,  non  solum  prolii- 
bentur  tanquam  legitimas  scientise  couclusiones  defendere, 
sed  pro  erroribus  potius,  qui  fallacem  veritatis  speciem  pros 
se  ferant,  habere  tenentur  omnino. 

Neque  solum  fides  et  ratio  inter  se  dissidere  nunquam 
possunt,  sed  opem  quoque  sibi  mutuam  ferunt,  cum  recta 
ratio  fidei  fundamenta  demonstret;  ejusque  lumine  illustrata 
rerum  divinarum  scientiam  excolat ;  fides  vero  rationem 
ab  erroribus  liberet  ac  tueatur,  earn  que  multiplici  cognitione 
instruat.  Quapropter  tantum  abest,  ut  Ecclesia  humana- 
rum  artium  et  disciplinarum  culturoe  obsistat,  ut  hauc 
multis  modis  juvet  atque  promoveat.  Non  enim  commoda 
ab  iis  ad  hominum  vitam  diamanantia  aut  ignorat  aut  de- 
spicit;  fatetur  imo,  eas,  quemadmodum  a  Deo,  scientiarum 
Domino,  profectaj  sunt,  ita  si  rite  pertractentur,  ad  Deum, 
juvante  ejus  gratia,  perducere.  Nee  sane  ipsa  vctat,  ne 
hujusmodi  disciplinte  in  suo  quajque  ambitu  propriis 
utantur  principiis  et  propria  methodo ;  sed  justam  banc 
libertatem  agnoscens,  id  sedulo  cavet,  ne  divinte  doctrinte 
repugnando  errores  in  se  suscipiant,  aut  fines  proprios 
trangressas,  ea,  qua)  sunt  fidei,  occupent  et  perturbent. 

Neque  enim  fidei  doctrina,  quam  Deus  revelavit,  velut 
philosophicum  inventum  proposita  est  humanis  iugenijs 
perficienda,  sed  tanquam  divinum  depositum  Cliristi  Spon- 
Sffi  tradita,  fideliter  custodiendo  et  infallibiliter  declaranda. 
Hinc  sacrorum  quoque  dogmatum  is  sensus  perpetuo  est 
retinendus,  quem  semel  declaravit  Sancta  Mater  Ecclesia, 
nee  unquam  ab  eo  sensu,  altioris  intelligentias  specie  et 
nomine,  recedendum.  Crescat  igitur  et  multum  vehemen- 
terque  proficiat,  tam  bingulonim,  quam  omnium,  tam  unius 
hominis,  quam  totius  Ecclesia),  atatum  ac  saeculorum  gra- 
dibus,  intelligentia,  scientia,  sapientia:  sed  in  suo  dumtaxat 
genere,  in  eodem  scilicet  dogmate,  eodem  sensu,  eadomque 
sententia.* 


*  Vincent.  Lirin.  (Jommon.  n.  28. 


t 


probi- 
[indere, 
pras 


APPENDIX. 


CAl^ONES. 


203 


De  Deo  rerum  omnium  Greatore. 

1.  Si  quia  unum  verum  Deum  visibilium  et  invisibilium 
Creator um  et  Dominum  negaverit ;  anathema  sit. 

2.  Si  quis  proeter  materiam  nihil  esse  affirmare  non  eru- 
buerit;  anathema  sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit,  iinam  eamdemque  esse  Dei  et  rerum 
omnium  substantiam  vel  essentiam  ;  anathema  sit. 

4.  Si  quis  dixerit,  res  finitas,  turn  corporeas  turn  spiritu- 
alcs,  aut  saltern  spirituales,  e  divinA,  substantia,  emanasse; 

aut  divinam  essentiam  sui  manifestatione  vel  evolutiono 
fieri  omnia; 

aut  denique  Deum  esse  ens  universale  seu  indefinitum, 
quod  sese  determinando  constituat  rerum  uliiversitatem  in 
genera,  species  et  individua  distinctam;  anathema  sit. 

5.  Si  quis  non  confiteatur,  mundum,  resque  omnes,  qua) 
in  eo  contmentur,  et  spirituales  et  materiales,  secundum 
totam  suam  substantiam  a  Deo  ex  nihilo  esse  productas; 

aut  Deum  dixerit  non  voluntate  ab  omni  necessitate 
hberii,  sed  tarn  necessario  creasso,  quam  necessario  amat 
seipsimi; 

aut  mundum  ad  Dei  gloriam  conditum  esse  negaverit; 
anathema  sit. 


n. 

De  Bevelatione. 

1.  Si  quia  dixerit,  Deum  unum  et  verum,  Crratorem  et 
Dominum  nostrum,  per  ea,  qua;  facta  simt,  natiu*ah  rationia 
Immanii)  lumine  cei-to  cognosci  non  posse  ;  anathema  sit. 

2.  Si  quis  dixerit,  fieri  non  posse,  aut  non  exi^edire,  ut 


I;  : 


204 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


per  revelationem  divinam  homo  de  Deo,  cultuqne  ei  exhi- 
bendo  edoceatur ;  anathema  sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit,  hominem  ad  cognitionem  et  perfec- 
tionem,  quJB  natui'alem  superet,  divinitiis  evehi  non  posse, 
sed  ex  seipso  ad  omnis  tandem  veri  et  boni  possessionem 
jugi  profectu  pertingere  posse  et  debere ;  anathema  sit. 

4.  Si  quis  saera3  Scripturoc  hbros  integros  cum  omnibus 
suis  partibus,  prout  illos  sancta  Tridentina  Synodus  recen- 
suit,  pro  saeris  et  canonicis  non  susceperit,  aut  eos  divinitus 
inspiratos  esse  negaverit ;  anathema  sit. 


m. 

De  Fide. 


1.  Si  quis  dixerit,  rationem  humanam  ita  independentem 
esse,  ut  fides  ei  a  Deo  imperaii  non  possit;  anathema  sit. 

2.  Si  quis  dixerit,  fidem  divinam  a  naturali  de  Deo  et 
rebus  moralibus  scientia  non  distingui,  ac  propterea  ad 
fidem  divinam  non  requiri,  ut  revelata  Veritas  propter  auc- 
toritatem  Dei  revelantis  credatur;  anathema  sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit,  revelationem  divinam  extemis  signis 
credibilem  fieri  non  posse,  ideoque  sola  interna  cujusque  ex- 
perientia  aut  inspiratione  privata  homines  ad  fidem  moveri 
debere;  anathema  sit. 

4.  Si  quis  dixerit,  miracula  nulla  fieri  posse,  proindeque 
omnes  de  iis  narrationes,  etiam  in  sacra  Scripturu  coiiteutas, 
inter  fabulas  vel  mythos  ablegandas  esse :  aut  miracula 
certo  cognosci  numquam  posse,  nee  iis  divinam  rehgionis 
Christiana)  originem  rito  probari ;  anathema  sit. 

5.  Si  quis  dixerit,  assensum  fidei  christians  non  esse 
liberum,  sed  argumentis  humanoc  rationis  necessarit)  pro- 
duci ;  aut  ad  solam  fidem  vivam,  qutc  per  eharitatem  opcra- 
tur,  gratiam  Dei  necessariam  esse ;  anathema  sit. 

G.  Si  quis  dixerit,  parcm  esse  conditionem  fideUum  atque 
eorum,  qui  ad  fidem  uuice  veram  nondum  pervenerunt,  ita 


exhi- 


APPENDIX. 


205 


ut  catholici  justam  caiisam  habere  possint,  fidem,  quam  sub 
Ecclesios  magisterio  jam  susceperunt,  assensu  suspense  in 
dubium  vocandi,  donee  demonstrationem  scientificam 
credibilitatis  et  veritatis  fidei  suaj  absolverint;  anathema 
sit. 


IV. 


De  Fide  et  Ratione. 

1.  Si  quis  dixerit,  in  revelatione  divina  nulla  vera  et 
propria  dicta  mysteria  contineri,  sed  universa  fidei  dogmata 
posse  per  rationem  rite  excultam  e  naturalibus  principiis 
intelhgi  et  demonstrari;  anathema  sit. 

2.  Si  quis  dixerit,  disciplinas  humanas  ea  cum  libertate 
tractandas  esse,  ut  eanmi  assertiones,  etsi  doctrinse  re- 
velatse  adversentur,  tanquam  vera3  retineri,  neque  ab  Ec- 
clesiii  proscribi  possint ;  anathema  sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit,  fieri  posse,  ut  dogmatibus  ab  Ecclesi4 
propositis  aliquando  secundum  progressum  scientios  sensus 
tribuendus  sit  alius  ab  eo,  quern  intellexit  et  intelligit  Ec- 
clesia;  anathema  sit. 

Itaque  supremi  pastorahs  Nostri  officii  debitum  exe- 
queutes,  omnes  Christi  fideles,  maxime  vere  eos,  qui  prae- 
sunt  vel  docendi  munere  funguntur,  per  viscera  Jesu 
Christi  obtestamur,  nee  non  ejusdem  Dei  et  Salvatoris 
nostri  auctoritate  jubemus,  ut  ad  hos  errores  a  Sancta  Ec- 
clesia  arcendos  et  ehminandos,  atque  purissimoe  fidei  luctm 
pandendam  studimn  et  operam  conferant. 

Quoniam  vero  satis  non  est,  haereticam  pravitatem 
devitare,  nisi  ii  quoque  errores  dihgenter  fugiantur,  qui  ad 
illam  plus  minusve  accedunt ;  omnes  officii  monemus,  ser- 
vandi  etiam  Constitutiones  et  Decreta,  quibus  prava?  ejus- 
modi  opiniones,  quoo  isthic  diserte  non  enumerantiu',  ab 
hac  Sancta  Sede  proscripta)  et  prohibitae  sunt. 

Datum  Romanee  in  publictl  Sessione  in  Vaticana  Basilic^ 


2o6 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


solemniter  celebrata  anno  Incurnationis  Dominicae  mille- 
simo  octingentesimo  septuagesimo,  die  -vigesima  quarta 
Aprilis. 

Pontificatus  Nostri  anno  vigesimo,  quarto. 

Ita  est. 

JOSEPHUS, 

Episcopus  S.  Hippolyti, 
Seci'etarius  Concilii  Vaticani. 


Translation. 

DOGMATIC  CONSTITUTION  ON  THE 
CATHOLIC  FAITH. 


PIUS,  BISHOP,  SERVANT  OF  THE  SERVANTS  OP  GOD,  WITH  THE 
APPROVAL  OF  THE  SACRED  COUNCIL,  FOE  PERPETUAL  EE 
MEMBRAN'CE. 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  Redeemer 
of  INIankind,  before  returning  to  his  heavenly  Father,  pro- 
mised that  He  would  be  with  the  Church  Militant  on  earth 
all  days,  even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world.  There- 
fore, He  has  never  ceased  to  be  present  with  His  beloved 
Spouse,  to  assist  her  when  teaching,  to  bless  her  when  at 
work,  and  to  aid  her  when  in  danger.  And  this  His  salu- 
tary providence,  which  has  been  constantly  displayed  by 
other  innumerable  benefits,  has  been  most  manifestly 
proved  by  the  abundant  good  results  which  Christendom 
has  derived  fi-om  (Ecumenical  Councils,  and  particularly 
from  that  of  Trent,  although  it  was  held  in  evil  times. 
For,  as  a  consequence,  the  sacred  doctrines  of  the  faith 
have  been  defined  more  closely,  and  set  forth  more  fully, 
errors  have  been  condemned  and  restrained,  ecclesiatical 


APPENDIX. 


207 


mille- 
ruarta 


discipline  has  been  restored  and  more  firmly  secured,  the 
love  of  learning  and  of  piety  has  been  promoted  among 
the  clergy,  colleges  have  been  established  to  educate  youth 
for  the  sacred  warfare,  and  the  morals  of  the  Christian 
world  have  been  renewed  by  the  more  accurate  training  of 
the  faithful,  and  by  the  more  frequent  use  of  the  sacraments. 
Moreover,  there  has  resulted  a  closer  conmiunion  of  the 
membei-s  with  the  visible  head,  an  increase  of  vigor  in  the 
whole  mystical  body  of  Christ,  the  multiphcation  of  relig- 
ious congi'egations  and  of  other  institutions  of  Christian 
piety,  and  such  ardor  in  extending  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
throughout  the  world,  as  constantly  endures,  even  to  the 
sacrifice  of  life  itself. 

But  while  we  recall  with  due  thankfulness  these  and 
other  signal  benefits  which  the  divine  mercy  has  bestowed 
on  the  Church,  especially  by  the  last  CEcumenical  Council, 
we  cannot  restrain  our  bitter  sorrow  for  the  grave  evils, 
which  are  principally  due  to  the  fact  that  the  authority  of 
that  sacred  Synod  has  been  contemned,  or  its  wise  decrees 
neglected,  by  many. 

No  one  is  ignorant  that  the  heresies  proscribed  by  the 
Fathers  of  Trent,  by  which  the  divine  magisterium  of  the 
Church  was  rejected,  and  all  matters  regarding  religion 
were  surrendered  to  the  judgment  of  each  individual, 
gi'adually  became  dissolved  into  many  sects,  which  disa- 
greed and  contended  with  one  another,  until  at  length  not 
a  few  lost  all  faith  in  Christ.  Even  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
which  had  previously  been  declared  the  sole  source  and 
judge  of  Christian  doctrine,  began  to  be  held  no  longer  as 
divine,  but  to  be  ranked  among  the  fictions  of  mythology. 

Then  there  arose,  and  too  widely  overspread  the  world, 
that  doctrine  of  rationahsm,  or  natiu:alism,  which  opposes 
itself  in  eveiy  way  to  the  Chiistian  religion  as  a  supernat- 
ural institution,  and  works  with  the  utmost  zeal  in  order 
that,  after  Christ,  our  sole  Lord  and  Saviour,  has  been  ex- 
cluded from  the  minds  of  men,  and  from  the  life  and  moral 


208 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


acts  of  nations,  the  reign  of  what  they  call  piu'e  reason  or 
nature  may  be  established.  And  after  forsaking  and  re- 
jecting the  Chiistian  religion,  and  denying  the  true  God 
and  His  Christ,  the  minds  of  many  have  sunk  into  the  abyss 
of  Pantheism,  Materialism,  and  Atheism,  until,  denying 
rational  natiu'e  itself,  and  every  sound  rule  of  right,  they 
labor  to  destroy  the  deepest  foundations  of  human  society. 

Unhappily,  it  has  yet  further  come  to  pass  that,  while 
this  impiety  prevailed  on  every  side,  many  even  of  the  chil- 
dren of  the  Catholic  Church  have  strayed  from  the  path 
of  true  piety,  and  by  the  gradual  diminution  of  the  truths 
they  held,  the  Cathohc  sense  became  weakened  in  them. 
For,  led  away  by  various  and  strange  doctrines,  utterly 
confusing  nature  and  grace,  human  science  and  divine 
faith,  they  are  found  to  deprave  the  true  sense  of  the  doc- 
trines which  our  Holy  Mother  Chiu'ch  holds  and  teaches, 
and  endanger  the  integi'ity  and  the  soundness  of  the  faith. 

Considering  these  things,  how  can  the  Church  fail  to  bo 
deeply  stuTcd  ?  For,  even  as  God  wills  all  men  to  be  saved, 
and  to  arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  ;  even  as 
Christ  came  to  save  what  had  perished,  and  to  gather  to- 
gether the  children  of  God  who  had  been  dispersed,  so  the 
Church,  constituted  by  God  the  mother  and  teacher  of  na- 
tions, knows  its  own  office  as  debtor  to  all,  and  is  ever 
ready  and  watchful  to  raise  the  fallen,  to  support  those 
who  are  falling,  to  embrace  those  who  return,  to  confirm 
the  good  and  to  carry  them  on  to  better  thmgs.  Hence,  it 
can  never  forbear  from  witnessing  to  and  proclaiming  the 
truth  of  God,  -vshich  heals  all  things,  knowing  the  words 
addressed  to  it :  "  My  Spirit  that  is  in  thee,  and  my  words 
that  I  have  put  in  thy  mouth,  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy 
mouth,  from  henceforth  and  forever"  (Isaias  hx.  21). 

We,  therefore,  following  the  footsteps  of  oui  jn^edeces- 
sors.  have  never  ceased,  as  becomes  our  supreme  Apostolic 
office,  from  teaching  and  defending  Cathohc  truth,  and 
condemning  doctrines  of  eiTor.     And  now,  with  the  Bish- 


APPENDIX. 


209 


eason  or 
and  re- 
rae  God 
;lie  abj.ss 
cJenying- 
rlit,  they 
society, 
at,  while 
the  chil- 
he  jiath 
e  truths 

a  thorn. 

utterly 

diviuo 

the  doc- 
teaches, 

le  faith. 

Lil  to  be 

3  saved, 

Jven  as 

her  to- 
so  the 
of  na- 

is  ever 
those 

oiifirm 

nee,  it 

tig  the 

words 

words 

•f  thy 

ieces- 

stolic 

and 

Bish- 


ops of  the  whole  world  assembled  round  us,  and  judging 
with  us,  congregated  by  our  authority,  and  in  the  Holy 
Spirit,  in  this  (Ecumenical  Council,  we,  supported  by  the 
Word  of  God  written  and  handed  down  as  we  received  it 
from  the  CathoHc  Church,  preserved  with  sacredness  and 
set  forth  according  to  truth, — have  determined  tc  profess 
and  declare  the  salutary  teaching  of  Christ  fi-om  this  Chair 
of  Peter,  and  in  sight  of  all,  proscribing  and  condemning, 
by  the  power  given  to  us  of  God,  all  errors  contrary  there- 
to. 


CHAPTER  I. 

or  GOD,  THE  CEEATOR  OF  ALL  THINGS. 

The  Holy  Catholic  Apostolic  Roman  Church  believes  and 
confesses  that  there  is  one  true  and  living  God,  Creator 
and  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  Almighty,  Eternal,  Im- 
mense, Incomprehensible,  Infinite  in  intelligence,  in  will, 
and  in  all  perfection,  who,  as  being  one,  sole,  absolutely 
simple  and  immutable  spiritual  substance,  is  to  be  declared 
as  really  and  essentially  distinct  from  the  world,  of  supreme 
beatitude  in  and  from  Himself,  and  ineffably  exalted  above 
all  things  which  exist,  or  are  conceivable,  except  Himself. 

This  one  only  true  God,  of  His  own  goodness  and  al- 
mighty power,  not  for  the  increase  or  acquirement  of  His 
o'ATi  happiness,  but  to  manifest  His  perfection  by  the  bless- 
ings which  He  bestows  on  creatures,  and  with  absolute 
freedom  of  Counsel,  created  out  of  nothing,  from  the  very 
first  beginning  of  time,  both  the  spiritual  and  the  coqaoreal 
creature,  to  wit,  the  angelical  and  the  mundane,  and  after- 
wards the  human  creature,  as  partaking,  in  a  sense,  of 
both,  consisting  of  spirit  and  of  body. 

God  protects  and  governs  by  His  Providence  all  things 


i 


r 


2IO 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


which  He  hath  made,  "  reaching  from  end  to  end  mightily, 
and  ordering  all  things  sweetly  "  (Wisdom  viii.  1 ).  For 
"  all  things  are  bare  and  open  to  His  eyes  "  (Heb.  iv.  13), 
even  those  which  are  yet  to  be  by  the  free  action  of  crea- 
tures. 


CHAPTEE  n. 


or   REVELATION. 


The  same  Holy  Mother  Church  holds  and  teaches  that 
God,  the  beginning  and  end  of  all  things,  may  be  certainly 
known  by  the  natural  light  of  human  reason,  by  means  of 
created  things ;  "  for  the  invisible  things  of  Him  from  the 
creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  understood 
by  the  things  that  are  made  "  (Romans  i.  20),  but  that  it 
pleased  His  wisdom  and  bounty  to  reveal  Himself,  and  the 
eternal  decrees  of  His  will,  to  mankind  by  another  and  a 
supernatural  way  :  as  the  Aj)ostle  says,  "  God,  having  spok- 
en on  divers  occasions,  and  many  ways,  in  times  past,  to 
the  fathers  by  the  prophets ;  last  of  aU,  in  these  days,  hath 
spoken  to  us  by  His  Son  "  (Hebrews  i.  1,  2). 

It  is  to  be  ascribed  to  this  divine  revelation,  that  such 
truths  among  things  divine  as  of  themselves  are  not  be- 
yond human  reason,  can,  even  in  the  present  condition  of 
mankind,  be  known  by  every  one  with  facihty,  with  firm 
assurance,  and  with  no  admixture  of  error.  This,  how- 
ever, is  not  the  reason  why  revelation  is  to  be  called  abso- 
lutely necessary ;  but  because  God  of  His  infinite  goodness 
has  ordained  man  to  a  supernatural  end,  viz.,  to  be  a 
sharer  of  divine  blessings  which  utterly  exceed  the  intelli- 
gence of  the  human  mind ;  for  "  eye  hath  not  seen ,  nor 
ear  heard,  neither  hath  it  entered  into  the  heart  of  man, 
what  things  God  hath  prepared  for  them  that  love  Him  " 
(1  Cor.  ii.  9). 


APPENDIX. 


211 


Further,  this  supernatural  revelation,  according  to  the 
universal  beUef  of  the  Church,  declared  by  the  Sacred 
S}Tiod  of  Trent,  is  contained  in  the  written  books  and  un- 
written traditions  which  have  come  down  to  us,  having 
been  received  by  the  Apostles  from  the  mouth  of  Christ 
himself,  or  from  the  Ajjostles  themselves,  by  the  dictation 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  have  been  transmitted,  as  it  were,  from 
hand  to  hand.*  And  these  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament are  to  be  received  as  sacred  and  canonical,  in  their 
integrity,  with  all  their  parts,  as  they  are  enumerated  in 
the  decree  of  the  said  Council,  and  are  contained  in  the 
ancient  Latin  edition  of  the  Vulgate.  These  the  Church 
holds  to  be  sacred  and  canonical,  not  because,  having  been 
carefully  composed  by  mere  human  industry,  they  were 
afterwards  approved  by  her  authority,  nor  merely  because 
they  contain  revelation,  with  no  admixture  of  error,  but 
because,  having  been  written  by  the  inspiratiDn  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  they  have  God  for  their  author,  and  have  been  de- 
Hvered  as  such  to  the  Church  herseK. 

And  as  the  things  which  the  Holy  Synod  of  Trent  de- 
creed for  the  good  of  souls  concerning  the  interpretation 
of  Divme  Scripture,  in  order  to  curb  rebelUous  spirits, 
have  been  wrongly  explained  by  some,  We,  renewing  the 
said  decree,  declare  this  to  be  their  sense,  that,  in  matters 
of  faith  and  morals,  appertaining  to  the  building  up  of 
Christian  doctrine,  that  is  to  be  held  as  the  true  sense  of 
Holy  Scripture  which  our  Holy  Mother  Church  hath  held 
and  holds,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  judge  of  the  true  sense 
and  interpretation  of  the  Holy  Scriptm*e ;  and  therefore 
that  it  is  permitted  to  no  one  to  interpret  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
ture contrary  to  this  sense,  nor,  hkewise,  contrary  to  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers. 


*  Canons  and  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  Session  tlie  Fourth. 
Decree  concerning  the  Canonical  Scriptures. 


212 


THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


CHAPTER  nX 


ON   FAITH. 


Man  bciiif]f  wholly  clcpcnclcnt  upon  God,  as  upon  his 
Creator  and  Lord,  and  created  reason  beinj?  absolutely 
subject  to  uncreated  truth,  wo  arc  boimd  to  yield  to  God, 
by  faith  in  His  revelation,  the  full  obedience  of  our  intelli- 
gence and  will.  And  the  Cathohc  Church  teaches  that 
this  faith,  which  is  the  beginnmg  of  man's  salvation,  is  a 
supernatural  virtue,  whereby,  inspired  and  assisted  by  the 
grace  of  God,  we  beUeve  that  the  things  which  He  has  re- 
vealed are  true  ;  not  because  of  the  intrinsic  truth  of  the 
things,  viewed  by  the  natural  light  of  reason,  but  because 
of  the  authority  of  God  Himself  who  reveals  them,  and 
Who  can  neither  be  deceived  nor  deceive.  For  faith,  as 
the  Apostle  testifies,  is  "the  substance  of  things  hoped 
for,  the  conviction  of  things  that  ai)pear  not"  (Hebrews 
i.  11). 

Nevertheless,  in  order  that  the  obedience  of  our  faith 
might  be  in  harmony  with  reason,  God  willed  that  to  the 
interior  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  there  should  be  joined  ex- 
terior proofs  of  His  revelation;  to  wit,  divine  facts,  and 
especially  miracles  and  prophecies,  which,  as  they  mani- 
festly display  the  omnipotence  and  infinite  Imowledgo  of 
God,  are  most  certain  proofs  of  His  divine  revelation, 
adapted  to  the  intelligence  of  all  men.  Wherefore,  both 
]\[oses  and  the  Prophets,  and  most  especially,  Christ  our 
Lord  Himself,  showed  forth  many  and  most  evident  mir- 
acles and  propliecies  ;  and  of  the  Apostles  we  read:  "But 
th(\y  going  foi*th  preached  everywhere,  the  Lord  working 
withal,  and  conlh-ming  the  word  with  signs  that  followed" 
(Mark  xvi.  20).  And  again,  it  is  written:  "We  have  tho 
more  Imn  proi)hoti('al  word,  whereunto  you  do  well  to  attend, 
as  to  a  hght  shining  in  a  dark  place  "  (2  St.  Peter  i.  19). 


APPENDIX. 


213 


But  though  the  assent  of  faith  is  by  no  means  a  blind 
action  of  the  mind,  still  no  man  can  assent  to  the  Gospel 
teaching,  as  is  necessary  to  obtain  salvation,  without  the 
illumination  and  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  gives 
to  all  men  sweetness  in  assenting  to  and  beheving  in  the 
truth.*  Wherefore,  Faith  itself,  even  when  it  does  not 
work  by  charity,  is  in  itself  a  gift  of  God,  and  the  act  of 
faitli  is  a  work  appertainmg  to  salvation,  by  which  man 
yields  voluntary  obedience  to  God  Himself,  by  assenting 
to  and  co-operating  with  His  gi'ace,  which  he  is  able  to 
resist. 

Further,  all  those  things  are  to  bo  beheved  with  divine 
and  CathoHc  faith  whi(;h  are  contained  in  the  word  of  God, 
written  or  handed  down,  and  which  the  Church,  either  by 
a  solemn  judgment,  or  by  her  ordinary  and  universal  ma- 
gisterium,  proposes  for  behef  as  having  been  divinely  re- 
vealed. 

And  since,  without  faith,  it  is  impossible  to  please  God, 
and  to  attain  to  the  fellowship  of  His  chil(h*en,  therefore 
without  faith  no  one  has  ever  attained  justification,  nor 
will  any  one  obtain  eternal  life,  unless  he  shall  have  per- 
severed in  faith  unto  the  end.  And,  that  we  may  be  able 
to  satisfy  the  obligation  of  embracing  the  true  faith  and  of 
constantly  persevering  in  it,  God  has  instituted  the  Church 
through  His  only  begotten  Son,  and  has  bestowed  on  it 
manifest  notes  of  that  institution,  that  it  may  be  recognized 
by  all  men  as  the  guardian  and  teacher  of  the  revealed 
AVord;  for  to  the  Cathohc  Church  alone  belong  all  those 
many  and  admirable  tokens  which  have  been  divinely  es- 
tablished for  the  evident  credibility  of  the  Christian  Faith. 
Kay,  more,  the  Church  by  itself,  with  its  marvellous  exten- 
sion, its  eminent  holiness,  and  its  inhcxhaustible  fruitfnl- 
ness  m  every  good  thing,  with  its  Catholic  unity  and  its 


*  C'aiioiiH  of  tlid  Second  (.'outicil  of  ()raii<;;(',  connrnicd  by  Poix;  Uoiil- 
fucc;  II.,  A.I).  n20,  (i;,niiiiHt  the  Hciiiipclii.niaim,  can.  vii.  Sec  Dcuziiiycr'b 
Enchiridion  Hyrnbolorum,  p.  50.    Wiirzburg,  ISS'l. 


214 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


invincible  stability,  is  a  great  and  perpetual  motive  of 
credibility,  and  an  irrefutable  witness  of  its  own  divine 
mission. 

And  thus,  like  a  standard  set  up  unto  the  nations  (Isaino 
xi.  12),  it  both  invites  to  itself  those  who  do  not  yet  believe, 
and  assm^es  its  children  that  the  faith  which  they  profess 
rests  on  the  most  firm  foundation.  And  its  testimony  is 
efficaciously  supported  by  a  power  from  on  high.  For  our 
most  merciful  Lord  gives  His  grace  to  stir  up  and  to  aid 
those  who  are  astray,  that  they  may  come  to  a  knowledge 
of  the  truth ;  and  to  those  whom  He  has  brought  out  of 
darkness  into  His  own  admirable  Hght  He  gives  His  grace 
to  strengthen  them  to  persevere  in  that  light,  deso'ting 
none  who  desert  not  Him.  Therefore  there  is  no  parity 
between  the  condition  of  those  who  have  adhered  to  the 
Catholic  truth  by  the  heavenly  gift  of  faith,  and  of  those 
who,  led  by  human  opinions,  follow  a  false  religion ;  for 
those  who  have  received  the  faith  under  the  magistei-ium 
of  the  Church  can  never  have  any  just  cause  for  changing 
or  doubting  that  faith.  Therefore,  giving  thanks  to  God 
the  Father  who  has  made  us  worthy  to  be  partakers  of  the 
lot  of  the  Saints  in  light,  let  us  not  neglect  so  gi'eat  salva- 
tion, but  with  our  eyes  fixed  on  Jesus,  the  author  and  fin- 
isher of  our  Faith,  let  us  hold  fast  the  confession  of  our 
hope  without  wavering.     (Hebr.  xii.  2,  and  x.  23.) 


CHAPTER  IV. 


OF    FAITH  AND   KEASON. 


The  Catholic  Clnu'd),  with  one  consent  has  also  ever 
iicld  and  does  hold  that  there  is  a  two-fold  ord(U'  of  Icnowl- 
edge  distuict  both  in  prmciplo  and  also  in  object;  ui  prin- 
ciple, because  oui*  knowledge  in  the  one  is  by  natui'al 


APPENDIX. 


215 


>tive  of 
divine 


;  for 
fiuiu 


reason,  and  in  the  other  by  divmc  faith;  in  object,  because, 
besides  those  things  to  which  natural  reason  can  attain, 
there  are  proposed  to  our  behef  mysteries  hidden  in  God, 
which,  unless  divinely  revealed,  cannot  be  known.  AVhere- 
fore  the  Apostle,  who  testifies  that  God  is  known  by  the 
gentiles  through  created  things,  still,  when  discoursing  of 
the  grace  and  truth  which  come  by  Jesus  Christ  (John  i. 
17)  says  :  "  We  speak  the  wisdom  of  God  in  a  mystery,  a 
wisdom  which  is  hidden,  which  God  ordained  before  the 
world  unto  our  glory ;  which  none  of  the  princes  of  this 
world  knew  .  .  .  but  to  us  God  hath  revealed  them  by 
His  Spirit.  For  the  Sphit  searcheth  all  thmgs,  yea,  the 
deep  things  of  God  "  (1  Cor.  ii.  7-9).  And  the  only-begot- 
ten Son  hunself  gives  thanks  to  the  Father,  because  He 
has  liid  these  things  from  the  wise  and  prudent,  and  has 
revealed  them  to  little  ones  (Matt.  .':i.  25). 

Keason,  indeed,  enhghtencd  by  faith,  when  it  seeks  ear- 
nestly, piously,  and  calmly,  attains  by  a  gift  from  God 
some,  and  that  a  very  fruitful,  understanding  of  mysteries; 
partly  fi'om  the  analogy  of  those  things  which  it  naturally 
knows,  partly  fi-om  the  relations  which  the  mysteries  bear 
to  one  another  and  to  the  last  end  of  man ;  but  reason 
never  becomes  cai)able  of  apprehending  mysterieo  as  it 
does  those  truths  which  constitute  its  proper  object.  For 
the  divine  mysteries  by  their  own  natm'e  so  far  transcend 
the  created  intelligence  that,  even  when  delivered  by  reve- 
lation and  received  by  faith,  they  remain  covered  with  the 
veil  of  faith  itself,  and  shrouded  in  a  certain  degree  of 
darkness,  so  long  as  we  are  pilgiims  in  this  mortal  lifo,  not 
yet  with  God  ;  "  for  wo  walk  by  faith  and  not  by  sight " 
(2  Cor.  V.  7). 

Hut  although  faith  is  above  reason,  there  can  never  bo 
any  real  discrepancy  between  faith  and  reason,  since  the 
same  God  who  reveals  mysteries  and  infuses  faith  has  be- 
stowed the  light  of  reason  on  the  human  mind,  and  God 
cannot  deny  Himself,  nor  can  (ruth  ever  contradict  truth. 


2l6 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


i 


The  false  appearance  of  sach  a  contradiction  is  mainly  due, 
either  to  the  dogmas  of  faith  not  having  been  understood 
and  exi30unded  according  to  the  mind  of  the  Church,  or  to 
the  inventions  of  opinion  having  been  taken  for  the  ver- 
dicts of  reason.  We  define,  therefore,  that  every  assertion 
contrary  to  a  truth  of  enlightened  faith  is  utterly  false.* 
Further,  the  Church,  which,  together  with  the  ApostoHc 
office  of  teaching,  has  received  a  charge  to  guard  the  de- 
posit of  faith,  derives  from  God  the  right  and  the  duty  of 
proscribing  false  science,  lest  any  should  be  deceived  by 
philosophy  and  vain  fallacy  (Coloss.  ii.  8).  Therefore  all 
faithful  Christians  are  not  only  forbidden  to  defend,  as 
legitimate  conclusions  of  science,  such  opinions  as  are 
known  to  be  contrary  to  the  doctrines  of  faith,  especially 
if  they  have  been  condemned  by  the  Church,  but  are  alto- 
gether bound  to  account  them  as  eiTors  which  put  on  the 
fallacious  aj)pearancc  of  truth. 

And  not  only  can  faith  and  reason  never  be  opposed  to 
one  another,  but  they  are  of  mutual  aid  one  to  the  other ; 
for  right  reason  demonstrates  the  foundations  of  faith,  and 
enlightened  by  its  light,  cultivates  the  science  of  things 
divine ;  wliile  faith  frees  and  guards  reason  from  en*ors, 
and  furnishes  it  with  manifold  knowledge.  So  far,  there- 
fore, is  the  Church  fi'om  opposing  the  cultivation  of  human 
arts  and  sciences,  that  it  in  many  ways  helps  and  promotes 
it.  For  the  Church  neither  ignores  nor  despises  the  bone- 
fits  of  human  life  which  result  from  the  arts  and  sciences, 
but  confesses  that,  as  they  came  from  God,  the  Lord  of  all 
science,  so,  if  they  be  rightly  used,  they  lead  to  God  by 
the  help  of  His  grace.  Nor  does  the  Church  forbid  that 
each  of  these  sciences  in  its  sphere  should  make  use  of  its 
own  princii^les  and  its  own  method  ;  but,,wliLlo  recognizing 
this  just  hbcrty,  it  stands  watchfully  on  guard,  lest  sciences, 

*  From  the  Bull  of  Pope  Loo  X.,  Apostolici  ref/imhiis,  roiid  in  tlio  VIII. 
ScBsion  of  till!  Fiftli  LuliTuii  Couucil,  a.d.  1513.  Sec  Lubbc'ti  Couneils, 
vol.  xis.  p.  U2.    Veui.ce,  1732. 


APPENDIX. 


217 


aiiily  due, 

nderstood 
n'cli,  or  to 
r  the  ver- 

assertion 
I'ly  false.* 
Apostolic 
d  the  de- 
e  duty  of 
3eived  by 
reforo  all 
[efeud,  as 
3  as  are 
3specially 

are  alto- 
it  on  the 

posed  to 
e  other ; 
lith,  and 
f  things 
I  en-ors, 
r,  there- 
human 
romotes 
10  bene- 
iciences, 
d  of  all 
Sod  by 
id  that 
e  of  its 
gnizing 
laenccs, 

lio  VIII. 
Jount'ils, 


setting  themselves  against  the  divine  teaching,  or  trans- 
gjessing  their  own  limits,  should  invade  and  disturb  the 
domain  of  faith. 

For  the  doctrine  of  faith  which  God  hath  revealed  has 
not  been  proposed,  like  a  philosoi)hical  invention,  to  be 
perfected  by  human  ingenuity,  but  has  been  delivered  as  a 
divine  deiDOsit  to  the  Spouse  of  Christ,  to  be  faithfully  kept 
and  infallibly  declared.  Hence  also,  that  meaning  of  the 
sacred  dogmas  is  perpetually  to  be  retained  which  our 
Holy  Mother  the  Church  has  once  declared ;  nor  is  that 
meaning  ever  to  be  departed  from,  under  the  pretence  or 
pretext  of  a  deeper  comprehension  of  them.  Let,  then,  the 
intelligence,  science,  and  wisdom  of  each  and  all,  of  indi- 
viduals and  of  the  whole  Church,  in  all  ages  and  aU  times, 
increase  and  flouiish  in  abundance  and  vigor ;  but  simply 
in  its  own  proper  kind,  that  is  to  say,  in  one  and  the  same 
doctrine,  one  and  the  same  sense,  one  and  the  same  judg- 
ment (Vincent,  of  Lerins,  Common,  n.  28). 


CANONS. 
I. 

Of  God',  the  Creator  of  all  things. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  deny  One  true  God,  Creator  and 
Lord  of  things  visible  and  invisible ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shaU  not  be  ashamed  to  afhrm  that,  except 
matter,  nothing  exists  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  Buy  that  the  substance  and  essence 
of  God  and  of  all  things  is  one  and  the  same ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  finite  things,  both  corporeal 
and  spintuaJ ,  or  at  least  siiiritual,  have  emanated  fi*om  the 
divine  substance ;  or  that  the  divine  essence  by  the  mani- 

10 


i 


P 


i.ii. 


218 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


festation  and  evolution  of  itself  becomes  all  things;  or, 
lastly,  that  God  is  universal  or  indefinite  being,  which  by 
determining  itself  constitutes  the  universality  of  things, 
distinct  according  to  genera,  species  and  individuals ;  let 
hun  be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  confess  not  that  the  world,  and  aU  things 
which  are  contained  in  it,  both  spiritual  and  material,  have 
been,  in  their  whole  substance,  produced  by  God  out  of 
nothing ;  or  shall  say  that  God  created,  not  by  His  will, 
free  from  all  necessity,  but  by  a  necessity  equal  to  the 
necessity  whereby  He  loves  Himself;  or  shall  deny  that 
the  world  was  made  for  the  glory  of  God ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

n. 

Of  Revelation. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  One  true  God,  our  Crea- 
tor and  Lord,  cannot  be  certainly  known  by  the  natural 
light  of  human  reason  through  created  things ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

2 .  If  any  one  shall  say  that  it  is  impossible  or  inexpedient 
that  man  should  be  taught,  by  divine  revelation,  concern- 
ing God  and  the  worship  to  be  paid  to  Him ;  let  him  bo 
anathema.  • 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  man  cannot  be  raised  by 
divine  power  to  a  higher  than  natural  knowledge  and  per- 
fection, but  can  and  ought,  by  a  continuous  progress,  to 
arrive  at  length,  of  himself,  to  the  possession  of  aU  that  is 
true  and  good ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  not  receive  as  sacred  and  canonical 
the  Books  of  Holy  Scriptui-e,  entire  with  aU  their  parts,  as 
the  Holy  Synod  of  Trent  has  enumerated  them,  or  shall 
deny  that  they  have  been  divinely  inspired;  let  him  be 
anathema 


APPENDIX. 


219 


m. 


Of  Faith. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  human  reason  is  so  independ- 
ent that  faith  cannot  be  enjoined  upon  it  by  God ;  let  him 
be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  divine  faith  is  not  distin- 
guished from  natural  knowledge  of  God  and  of  moral 
truths,  and  therefore  that  it  is  not  requisite  for  divine  faith 
that  revealed  tmth  be  believed  because  of  the  authority  of 
God,  Who  reveals  it ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  divine  revelation  cannot  be 
made  credible  by  outward  signs,  and  therefore  that  men 
ought  to  be  moved  to  faith  solely  by  the  internal  experience 
of  each,  or  by  private  inspiration  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  miracles  are  impossible,  and 
therefore  that  all  the  accounts  regarding  them,  even  those 
contained  in  Holy  Scripture,  are  to  be  dismissed  as  fabu- 
lous or  mythical ;  or  that  miracles  can  never  be  known  with 
certainty,  and  that  the  divine  origin  of  Christianity  cannot 
be  proved  by  them  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  assent  of  Christian  faith 
is  not  a  free  act,  but  inevitably  produced  by  the  arguments 
of  human  reason ;  or  that  the  grace  of  God  is  necessary 
for  that  hving  faith  only  which  worketh  by  charity;  let 
him  be  anathema. 

G.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  condition  of  the  faithful, 
and  of  those  who  have  not  yet  attained  to  the  only  true 
faith,  is  on  a  par,  so  that  CathoHcs  may  have  just  cause  for 
doubting,  with  suspended  assent,  the  faith  which  they  have 
already  received  under  the  magisterium  of  the  Church,  un- 
til they  shall  have  obtained  a  scientific  demonstration  of 
the  credibihty  and  truth  of  their  faith;  let  him  be  ana- 
thema. 


220 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


rv. 


I  ( 


Of  Faith  and  Reason. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  in  divine  revelation  there 
are  no  mysteries,  truly  and  properly  so  called,  but  that  all 
the  doctrines  of  faith  can  be  understood  and  demonstrated 
from  natural  principles,  by  properly  cultivated  reason  ;  let 
him  be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  human  sciences  are  to  be 
so  freely  treated,  that  their  assertions,  although  opposed 
to  revealed  doctrine,  are  to  be  held  as  true,  and  cannot  be 
condemned  by  the  Church ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  assert  it  to  be  possible  that  some- 
times, according  to  the  progress  of  science,  a  sense  is  to 
be  given  to  doctrines  propounded  by  the  Church  different 
from  that  which  the  Church  has  understood  and  under- 
stands ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

Therefore  We,  fulfilling  the  duty  of  our  supreme  pas- 
toral office,  entreat,  by  the  mercies  of  Jesus  Christ,  and, 
by  the  authority  of  the  same  our  God  and  Saviour,  We 
command,  aU  the  faithful  of  Christ,  and  especially  those 
who  are  set  over  others,  or  are  charged  with  the  office  of 
instruction,  that  they  earnestly  and  diligently  apply  them- 
selves to  ward  off,  and  eliminate,  these  errors  from  Holy 
Church,  and  to  spread  the  hght  of  pure  faith. 

And  since  it  is  not  sufficient  to  shun  heretical  pravity, 
imless  those  errors  also  be  dihgently  avoided  which  more 
or  less  nearly  approach  it,  We  admonish  all  men  of  the 
further  duty  of  observing  those  constitutions  and  decrees 
by  which  such  erroneous  opinions  as  are  not  hero  specifi- 
cally enumerated,  have  been  proscribed  and  condemned  by 
this  Holy  See. 


Given  at  Eome  in  public  Session  solemnly  held  in  the 
Vatican  Basilica  in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  one  thousand 


APPENDIX. 


221 


eiglit  hundred  and  seventy,  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of 
April,  in  the  twenty-fourth  year  of  our  Pontificate. 

In  conformity  with  the  original. 

Joseph,  Bishop  of  S,  Pollen, 
Secretary  of  the  Vatican  Council. 


TEXT  OF  THE  CONSTITUTIONS 


CONSTITVTIO   DOGMATICA  PRIMA  DE   ECCLESIA 

CHRISTI. 


PIVS  EPISCOPVS  SERWS  SEBVORVM  DEI  SACRO  APPROBANTE 
CONCIUO  AD  PERPETVAM  REI  MEMORIAM. 

Pastor  actemus  et  episcopus  animarum  nostrarum,  nt 
salutiferum  redemptionis  opus  perenne  redderet,  sanctam 
aedificare  Ecclesiam  decrevit,  in  qua  veluti  in  domo  Dei 
viventis  fideles  omnes  unius  fidei  et  charitatis  vinculo  con- 
tinerentur.  Quapropter,  priusquam  clarificare^^ur,  rogavifc 
Patrem  non  pro  Apostolis  tantum,  sed  et  pro  eis,  qui  cre- 
dituri  erant  per  verbum  eorum  in  ipsum,  ut  ctnnes  unum 
assent,  sicut  ipse  Filius  et  Pater  unum  sunt.  Quemad- 
modum  igitur  Aposfcolos,  quos  sibi  de  mundo  elegerat, 
misit  sicut  ipse  missus  erat  a  Patre :  ita  in  Ecclesia  sua 
Pastores  et  Doctores  usque  ad  consummationem  saeculi 
esse  voluit.  Ut  vero  episcopatus  ipse  unus  et  indivisua 
esset,  et  per  coliaerentes  sibi  invicem  sacerdotes  credentium 
multitudo  universa  in  fidei  et  communionis  unitate  conser- 
varetur,  beatum  Petrum  caeteris  Apostolis  praeponens  in 
ipso  instituit  perpetuum  utriusque  unitatis  principium  ao 


222 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


yisibile  fundamentum,  super  cuius  fortitudinem  aetemuin 
exstrueretur  templum,  et  Ecclesiae  coelo  inferenda  sublim- 
itas  in  huius  fidei  firmitate  consurgeret.*  Et  quoniara 
portae  inferi  ad  evertendam,  si  fieri  posset,  Ecclesiam  con- 
tra eius  fundamentum  divinitus  positum  maiori  in  dies  odio 
undique  insurgunt ;  Nos  ad  catholici  gregis  custodiam,  in- 
columitatem,  augmentum,  necessarium  esse  iudicamus, 
sacro  approbante  Concilio,  doctrinam  de  institutione,  per- 
petuitate,  ac  natura  sacri  Apostolici  primatus,  in  quo  totius 
Ecclesiae  vis  ac  soliditas  consistit,  cunctis  fidelibus  creden- 
dam  et  tenendam,  secundum  antiquam  atque  constantem 
imiversalis  Ecclesiae  fidem,  proponere,  atque  contraries, 
dominico  gregi  adeo  pemiciosos  errores  proscribere  et  cou- 
demnare. 


CAPUT  I. 


DE  AP0ST0LIC3I  PEIMATUa   IN   BEATO   PETRO   INSTITUTIONE. 

Docemus  itaque  et  declaramus,  iuxta  Evangelii  testimo- 
nia,  primatum  iurisdictionis  in  universam-  Dei  Ecclesiam 
immediate  et  directe  beato  Petro  Apostolo  promissum 
atque  collatum  a  Christo  Domino  fuisse.  Unum  enim 
Simonem,  cui  iam  pridem  dixerat  :  Tu  vocaberis  Cephas,  f 
postquam  ille  suam  edidit  coufessionem  inquiens  :  Tu  es 
Cbristus,  Eilius  Dei  vivi,  solemnibus  his  verbis  allocutus 
est  Dominus  :  Beatus  es  Simon  Bar-Iona :  quia  caro  et 
sanguis  non  revel  avit  tibi,  sed  Pater  mens,  qui  in  coelis 
est :  et  ego  dico  tibi,  quia  tu  es  Petrus,  et  super  hanc  pe- 
tram  aedificabo  Ecclesiam  meam,  et  portae  inferi  non 
praevalebunt  adversus  eam  :  et  tibi  dabo  clavcs  regni  coel- 
orum  :  et  quodcumque  hgavcris  super  terram,  erit  ligatum 

*  S.  Leo  M.  Serm.  iv.  (al.  iii.)  cap.  2,  in  diem  Natalie  sui. 

t  loau.  i.  43. 


APPENDIX. 


223 


et  in  coelis :  et  quodcumque  solveris  super  terrain,  crit 
solutum  et  in  coelis.*  Atque  uni  Simoni  Petro  contulit 
lesus  post  suam  resiirrectionem  summi  pastoris  et  rectoris 
iurisdictionem  in  totum  suam  ovile,  dicens  :  Pasce  aguos 
meos  :  Pascc  oves  meas.f  Iluic  tarn  manifestae  sacranim 
Scripturarura  doctrinae,  ut  ab  Ecclesia  catholica  semper 
iutellccta  est,  aperte  opponuntur  pravae  eorum  sententiae, 
qui  constitutam  a  Cbristo  Domino  in  sua  Ecclesia  regiminis 
formam  pervertentes  negant,  solum  Petrum  prae  caeteris 
Apostolis,  sive  seorsum  singulis  sive  omnibus  simul,  vero 
proprioque  iui:isdictionis  primatu  fuisse  a  Cbristo  instruc- 
tum  ;  aut  qui  affirmant,  eundem  primatum  non  immediate, 
dii-ecteque  ipsi  beato  Petro,  sed  Ecclesiae,  et  per  banc  illi 
ut  ipsius  Ecclesiae  ministro  delatum  fuisse. 

Si  quis  igitur  dixerit,  beatum  Petmm  Apostolum  non 
esse  a  Cbristo  Domino  constitutum  Apostolorum  omnium 
principem  et  totius  Ecclesiae  mibtantis  visible  caput ;  vel 
eundem  bonoris  tantum,  non  autem  verae  propriaeque 
iurisdictionis  primatum  ab  eodem  Domino  nostro  lesu 
Cbristo  directe  et  immediate  accepisse  ;  anatbema  sit. 


CAPUT  n. 

DE  PEEPETUITATE   PRBIATUS   BEATI  PETRI   IN   EOMANIS 
PONTinCIBUS. 


Quod  autem  in  beato  Apostolo  Petro  princeps  pastorum 
et  pastor  magnus  ovium  Dominus  Cbristus  lesus  in  per- 
petuam  salutem  ac  perenne  bouiim  Ecclesiae  instituit,  id 
eodcin  auctorc  in  Ecclesiae,  quae  fuudata  super  petram  ad 
fiuem  saeculoi-um  usque  firma  stabit,  iugiter  durare  necesse 
est.     NuUi  sane  dubium,  imo  saeculis  omnibus  notum  est, 


*  Matth.  xvi.  IG-l'J 


+  loan.  xxi.  15-17. 


\>      i 


l\    1 


1 

3     i  ^ 

it 

224 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


quod  sanctus  beatissimusque  Petrus,  Apostolonim  princeps 
et  caput,  fideique  columna  et  Ecclesiae  catholicac  fonda- 
mentum,  a  Domino  nostro  lesu  Cliristo,  Salvatore  liumam 
generis  ac  Redemptore,  claves  regni  accepit :  qui  ad  hoc 
usque  tempus  et  semper  in  suis  successoribus,  episcopis 
sanctae  Romanae  Sedis,  ab  ipso  fundatae,  eiusque  conse- 
cratae  sanguine,  vivet  et  praesidet  et  iudicium  exercet.* 
Unde  quicumque  in  hac  cathedra  Petro  succcdit,  is  secun- 
dum Christi  ipsius  institutionem  primatum  Petri  in  univer- 
sam  Ecclesium  obtinet.  Manet  ergo  dispositio  veritatis,  et 
beatus  Petrus  in  accepta  fortitudine  petraea  perseverans 
suscepta  Ecclesiae  gubernacula  non  rcliquit.f  Hac  de 
causa  ad  Romanam  Ecclesiam  propter  potentiorem  princi- 
palitatem  necesse  semj)er  fuit  omnem  convenire  Ecclesiam, 
hoc  est,  eos,  qui  sunt  undique  fideles,  ut  in  ea  Sede,  e  qua 
venerandae  communionis  iura  in  omnes  dimanant,  tam- 
quam  membra  in  capite  consociata,  in  unam  coi'poris 
compagem  coalescerent.l 

Si  quis  ergo  dixerit,  non  esse  ex  ipsius  Christi  Domini 
institutione  seu  iure  divino,  ut  beatus  Petrus  in  primatu 
super  universam  Ecclesiam  habeat  perpetuos  successorcs  ; 
aut  Romanum  Pontificem  non  esse  beati  Petri  in  eodem 
primatu  successorem  ;  anathema  sit. 


CAPUT  in. 

DE  VI  ET  RATIONE   PRIMATUS   ROMA^^  PONHFICIS. 

Quapropter  apertis  innixi  sacrarum  htterarum  testimo- 
niis,  et  inhaerentes  tum  Praedecessoriun  Nostronim,  Ro« 


*  Cf.  Ephcsiui  Concilii  Act.  iii. 

t  S.  Leo  M.  Serm.  iii.  (al.  ii.)  cap.  3. 

X  S.  Ircn  Adv.  Ilacr.  1.  iii.  c,  3,  ct  Couc.  Aquilei.  a.  381.  inter  cpp.  S. 
Ambros.  ep.  si.  , 


I 


APPENDIX. 


22=; 


manonim  Pontificum,  turn  Concilionim  generalmra  disertis, 
pcrsiiicuisqne  decretis,  innovamus  occumcnici  Concilii 
Florentini  definitionem,  qua  credcudum  ab  oninibuH  Cbristi 
fidelibus  est,  sanctam  Apostolicam  Sedem,  ct  Romanuiu 
Pontificem  in  universum  orbem  tenere  primatum,  ct  ipsiim 
Pontificem  Eomauum  succcssorem  esse  bcati  l^etri  IMu- 
cipis  Apostoloruin,  et  verum  Cbristi  Vicarium,  totiusqne 
Ecclesiae  caput,  et  omnium  Clmstianorum  patrem  ac  doc- 
torem  existere  ;  et  ipsi  in  beato  Petro  pascendi,  regendi  ac 
gubemandi  univcrsalem  Ecclesiam  a  Domino  nostro  Ijsu 
Cbristo  plenam  potestatem  traditam  esse  ;  queniadmodum 
etiam  in  gestis  oecumenicorum  Conciliornm  ct  in  sacris 
canonibus  continetur. 

Doccmus  proinde  et  declaramus,  Ecclesiam  Romanam 
disponento  Domino  super  omnes  alias  ordinariae  potesta- 
tis  obtinere  principatum,  et  banc  Koniani  Pontificis  iuris- 
dictionis  potestatem,  quae  vere  episcopalis  est,  immediatam 
esse  :  erga  quam  cuiuscumque  ritus  et  dignitatis  pastores 
atque  fideles,  tarn  seorsum  singuli  quam  simul  omnes, 
officio  bierarchicae  subordina.tionis,  veraeque  obedientiae 
obstringmitur,  non  solum  in  rebus,  quae  ad  fidem  et  mores, 
sed  etiam  in  iis,  quae  ad  disciplinam  et  regimen  Ecclesiae 
per  totum  orbcm  diffusae  pertinent  ;  ita  ut  custodita  cum 
Romano  Pontifice  tam  communionis,  quam  eiusdem  fidei 
jirofessionis  miitate,  Ecclesia  Cbristi  sit  unus  grex  sub  imo 
sunimo  pastore.  Haec  est  catbolicae  veritatis  doctrina,  a 
qua  deviare  salva  fide  atque  salute  nemo  potest. 

Tantum  autem  abest,  ut  baec  Summi  Pontificis  potestas 
officiat  ordinariae  ac  immediatae  iUi  episcopalis  iunsdic- 
tionis  potestati,  qua  Episcopi,  qui  positi  a  Spiritu  Sancto 
in  Apostolorum  locum  successerunt,  tamquam  veri  pasto- 
res assignatos  sibi  greges,  singuli  singulos,  pascunt  et 
regunt,  ut  eadem  a  supremo  ct  universali  Pastore  asseratur, 
roboretur  ac  vindicetur,  secundum  illud  sancti  Gregorii 
IMagni  :  Mens  bonor  est  bonor  universalis  Ecclesiae.  ^Meua 
lienor  est  fratrum  meorum  solidus  vigor. 


Turn  ego  vere 


^ 


10 


* 


I 


ri 


i 


1:!^ 


I,,  i 


{?■ 


226 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


honoratus  sum,  cum  singulis  quibusque  honor  debitus  non 
negatur.* 

Porro  ex  suprema  ilia  Romani  Pontificis  protestate 
gubemandi  universam  Ecclesiam  ius  eideni  esse  conse- 
quitur,  in  huius  sui  muneris  exercitio  libere  communicandi 
cum  pastoribus  et  gregibus  totius  Ecclesiae,  ut  iidem  ab 
ipso  in  via  salutus  doceri  ac  regi  possint.  Quare  damna- 
mus  ac  reprobamus  illorum  sententias,  qui  banc  supremi 
capitis  cum  pastoribus  et-gregibus  communicationem  licite 
impediri  posse  dicunt,  aut  eandem  reddunt  saeculari  potes- 
tati  obnoxiam,  ita  ut  contendant,  quae  ab  Apostolica  Sede 
vel  eius  auctoritate  ad  regimen  Ecclesiae  constituuntur,  vim 
ac  valorem  non  habere,  nisi  potestatis  saecularis  placito 
confirmentur. 

Et  quoniam  divino  Apostolici  primatus  iure  Romanus 
Pontifex  universae  Ecclesiae  praeest,  docemus  etiam  et  de- 
claramus,  eum  esse  iudicem  supremum  fidehum,f  et  in 
omnibus  causis  ad  examen  ecclesiasticum  spectantibus  ad 
ipsius  posse  indicium  recuiTi;J  Sedis  vero  Ai)ostolicae, 
cuius  auctoritate  maior  non  est,  indicium  a  nemine  fore 
retractandum,  neque  cuiquam  de  eius  hcere  iudicaro 
iudicio.§  Quare  a  recto  veritatis  tramite  abeiTant,  qui 
affirmant,  hcere  ab  iudiciis  Romanorum  Pontificum  ad 
Oecumenicum  Concihum  tamquam  ad  auctoritatem  Romano 
Pontifice  superiorem  appellare. 

Si  quis  itaque  dixerit,  Romanum  Pontificem  habere  tan- 
tummodo  officium  inspectionis  vel  directionis,  non  autein 
pif  nam  et  supremam  potestatem  iurisdictionis  in  universam 
Ecclesiam,  non  solum  in  rebus,  quae  ad  fidem  et  mores,  sod 
etiam  in  iis,  quae  ad  disciplinam  et  regimen  Ecclesiae  per 
totum  orbem  diffusae  pertinent ;  aut  eum  habere  tantum 
potiores  partes,  non  vero  totani  plenitudinom  huius  su  - 

*  Ep.  ad,  Eulop;.  Alcxandrin.  1.  vlii.  cp.  xxx. 

t  Pil  VV.  VI.  Briivc,  Supor  8olidltuto.  d.  JW  Nov.  178(3. 

X  Concll.  Occuin.  Lngdun.  II. 

§  Ep.  Nicolal  I.  ad  Michaelera  Impcratorcm. 


uon 


APPENDIX. 


227 


premae  potestatis;  ant  banc  eius  potestatem  non  esse 
ordinariam  et  immediatam  sive  in  omnes  ac  singulas 
ecclesias,  sive  in  omnes  et  singulos  pastores  et  fideles  ;  ana- 
thema sit. 


CAPUT  IV. 


DE   ROMANI   PONTDTICIS   IITTALLIBIU   IIAGISTERIO. 

Ipso  aut^m  Apostolico  primatu,  quem  Romanus  Pontifex 
tamqnam  Petri  principis  Apostolorum  successor  in  univer- 
sam  Ecclesiam  obtinet,  supremam  quoque  magisterii  po- 
testatem compreliendi,  haec  Sancta  Sedes  semper  tenuit, 
perjDetuus  Ecclesiae  usus  comprobat,  ipsaque  oecumenica 
Concilia,  ea  imprimis,  in  quibus  Oriens  cum  Occidente  in 
fidci  charitatisque  unionem  conveniebat,  declaraverunt. 
Patrcs  enim  Concilii  Constantinopolitani  quarti,  maiorura 
vestigiis  inliaerentes,  banc  solemnem  ediderunt  profes- 
sionem  :  Prima  salus  estv  roctae  fidei  regulam  custodire. 
Et  quia  non  potest  Domini  nostri  lesu  Christi  praeter- 
mitti  sentenHa  dicentis  :  Tu  es  Petnis,  et  super  bancpetram 
aedificalio  Ecclesiam  meam,  baec,  quae  dicta  sunt,  rerum 
probiintur  efiectibus,  quia  in  Sede  Apostobca  immaculata 
est  semper  cathobca  reservato  religio,  et  sancta  celebrata 
doctrina.  Ab  buius  ergo  fide  et  doctrina  separari  minima 
cupientes,  speramus,  ut  in  una  cummunione,  quam  Sedes 
Apostobca  praedicat,  esse  mereamur,  in  qua  est  Integra  et 
vera  Cbristianao  rebgionis  sobditas.*  Approbante  vero 
Lugduuensi  Concibo  secuudo,  Graeci  professi  sunt :  Sanc- 
tam  llomanam  Ecclesiam  summum  et  plenum  primatiun  et 
pri'icipatum  super  universam  Ecclesiam  catbolicam  obtinere, 
quem   se   ab   ipso   Domino  in  beato  Pctro   Apostolorum 


*  Ex  formula  8,  Honnisdiic  Pupae,  prout  ab  Iliulrliino  II.  Pfttrlbus 
Concilii  Oceiiinetiicl  VIIL,  Couttluutiuopolitaui  IV.,  propobltu  et  ab 
ilHdcm  Bubscripta  est. 


228 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


t-ii! 


m 


•tal'la 


11 


i  1  i: 


principe  sive  vertice,  cuius  Eomanus  Pontifex  est  successor, 
cum  potestatis  plenitudinc  recepisse  veraciter  et  liumiliter 
recognoscit ;  et  sicut  prae  caeteris  tenetur  fidei  veritatein 
defendere,  sic  et,  si  quae  de  fide  subortae  fuerint  quaes- 
tiones,  suo  debcut  iudicio  definiri.  Florentinum  denique 
ConciliniB  definivit :  Pontificem  Romanum,  verum  Chiisti 
Vicarium,  totiusque  Ecclesiae  caput  et  omnium  Christiano- 
rum  patrem  ac  doctorum  existere  ;  et  ipsi  in  beato  Petro 
pascendi,  regendi  ac  gubernandi  universalem  Ecclesiam  a 
Domino  nostro  Jesu  Christo  plenam  potestatem  traditam 
esse. 

Huic  pastorali  muneri  ut  satisfacerent,  Praedecessores 
Nostri  iadefessam  semper  operam  dederunt,  ut  saluuiris 
Christi  doctrina  apud  oixines  tenae  populus  propagai'etur, 
parique  cura  vigilarimt,  ut,  ubi  recepta  esset,  sincera  et 
pura  conservaretur.  Quocii'ca  totius  orbis  AntLstites  nunc 
singuK,  nunc  in  Synodis  congi'egati,  longam  ecclesiarum 
consuetudinem  et  antiquae  regulae  fonnam  sequcntes,  ea 
praesertim  pericula,  quae  in  negotiis  fidei  cmergobant  ad 
banc  Sedem  Apostolicam  retulerunt,  ut  ibi  poiissimum 
resarcirentur  damna  fidei,  ubi  fides  non  potest  sentiro  de- 
fectimi.*  Eomaui  autem  Pontifices,  prout  temporum  et 
rerum  conditio  suadebat,  nunc  convocatis  oecumeuicis  Con- 
ciliis  aut  explorata  Ecclesiae  per  orbem  dispersao  sentcntia, 
nunc  per  Synodos  particulares,  nunc  aliis,  quae  divina  sup- 
peaitabat  j)rovidentia,  adhibitis  auxiliis,  ea  tencnda  defini- 
venint,  quae  sacris  Scriptiiris  et  apostolicis  Traditionibus 
consentanea  Deo  adiutore  cognovcraut.  Neque  enim  Petri 
successoribus  Siuritus  Sanctus  promissus  est,  ut  eo  rcve- 
lante  uovam  doctrinam  patefacerent,  sod  ut  eo  assistento 
traditam  per  Apostolos  rovelationem  sou  fidei  dopositum 
san<!to  custodii'ont  cl  fideliter  exponerunt.  Quorum  (juidcm 
apostolicam  doctrinam  omucs  venerabiles  I'ati'es  am[)loxi 
et  sancti  Doctores  ortbodoxi  vencrati  atquo  secuti  sunt ; 


*Cf.  S.  Bcrc.  Eplst.  exc. 


APPENDIX. 


229 


plenissime  scientes,  banc  sancti  Petri  Sedem  ab  omiii 
semper  errore  illibatam  permanero,  secundum  Domini 
Salvatoris  nostri  divinam  pollicitationcm  discipulormu 
suorum  principi  factam  :  Ego  rogavipro  te,  lit  11  on  deficiat 
fides  tua,  et  tu  aliquando  conversus  confirma  fratres  tuos. 

Hoc  igitur  veritatis  et  fidei  numquam  deficientis  charis- 
ma Petro  eiusqiie  in  bac  Cathedi*a  successoribus  divinitus 
coUatum  est,  ut  excelso  suo  mmiere  iu  omnium  salutem 
fmigerentur,  ut  uuiversus  Christi  grex  per  eos  ab  erroria 
venenosa  esca  aversus,  coelestis  doctriiae  pabulo  nutrire- 
tur,  ut  sublata  scbismatis  occasione  Ecclesia  tota  una  con- 
servaretur,  atque  suo  fundamento  innixa  firma  adversus 
iiiferi  portas  consisteret. 

Atvero  cum  bac  ipsa  aetate,  qua  salutifera  Apostolici 
muiicris  eJBficacia  vel  maxime  requiritur,  non  pauci  invenian- 
tui',  qui  nUus  auctoritati  obtrectant ;  necessaiium  omnino 
esse  censemus,  praerogativam,  quam  unigenitus  Dei  Pilius 
cum  suramo  pastorali  oflficio  coniungere  dignatus  est, 
solemniter  asscrcre. 

Itaque  Nos  traditioni  a  fidei  Cliristianae  oxordio  per- 
ceptae  fideliter  inbacrendo,  ad  Dei  Salvatoris  nostri  gloriam, 
roligionis  CatboUcao  cxaltationem  et  Cbristianorum  pop- 
ulonim  salutem,  sacro  approbante  ConciUo,  docemus  et 
divinitus  revelatum  dogma  esse  definimus ;  Romanum 
l^outificem,  cum  ex  Catbcdi*a  loquitur,  id  est,  cum  omnium 
(Jbristianorum  Pastoris  et  Doctoris  munere  fuugens,  pro 
suprcma  sua  Apijstolica  auctoritato  doctrinam  do  lido  vol 
moribus  ab  imiversa  Ecclesia  tenendam  definit,  per  assis- 
tentiam  divinam,  ipsi  in  boato  Petro  promissam,  oa  in- 
fallibilitatc  pollero,  qua  divinus  IJedemptor  Ecclesiam  suam 
iu  definienda  doctrina  de  fide  vol  moribus  instructam  esso 
voluit  ;  ideoquo  ciusmodi  Jlomani  Pontificis  definitiones  ex 
scKo,  non  autom  ox  consensu  Ecclosiae  u^Tcformabilos  esse. 

Si  quis  autem  buic  Nostrao  dcfinitioui  contradicore,  quod 
Dous  avcrtat,  praesumpserit ;  anathema  sit. 

Datum  Romao,  iu  publica  Sessiono  in  Vaticana  Basilica 


• 

1' 

!  1 

.1? 

•1 

f 

1 

ii| 


m 


'It 


230 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


solemniter  celebrata  anno  Incamationis  Dominicae  mille- 
simo  octingentesimo  septuagesimo,  die  decima  octava  lulii. 
Pontificatus  Nostri  anno  vigesimo  quinto. 

Ita  est. 

JOSEPHUS, 

Episcopus  S.  Ippohjti, 
Secretarius  Concilii  Valicani. 


Translatlok. 

FIRST  DOGMATIC  CONSTITUTION  ON  THE 
CHURCH  OF  CHRIST. 

PUBLISHED   IN"   THE   FOURTH   SESSION   OF   THE  HOLY  CECUMENICAL 
COUNCIL   OF   THE   VATICAN. 

nUS  BISHOP.  SERVANT  OP  THE  SERVANTS  OF  GOD,  WITH 
THE  APPROVAL  OF  THE  SACKED  COUNCIL,  FOR  AN 
EVERL  A  STING  R  RMEMBRANCE. 

Thu  Eternal  Pastor  and  Bishop  of  our  sonls,  in  order  to 
continue  tt.r  all  time  the  life-giving  work  of  His  Ecdemp- 
tion,  determined  to  build  up  the  Holy  Chui'ch,  wherein,  as 
in  the  House  of  the  living  God,  all  who  believe  might  bo 
imited  in  the  bond  of  one  faith  and  one  charity.  Where- 
fore, before  he  entered  into  His  glory,  Ho  prayed  unto  the 
Father,  not  for  the  apostles  only,  but  for  those  also  who 
through  their  preaching  should  come  to  believe  in  Him, 
that  all  might  be  one  even  as  Ho  the  Son  and  the  Fatlier 
ore  one.'^  As  then  Ho  sent  the  Apostles  whom  lie  had 
chosen  to  Himself  from  the  world,  as  he  Himself  had  been 
Bent  by  the  Father :  so  Ho  willed  that  there  should  ever 
be  pastors  and  teachers  in  I  lis  Church  to  the  end  of  the 

*  St.  John.  xvli.  21. 


APPENDIX. 


231 


ille- 
alii. 


1 


world.  And  "in  order  tliat  the  Episcopate  also  might  be 
one  and  undivided,  and  that  by  means  of  a  closely  united 
priesthood  the  multitude  of  the  faithful  might  be  kept  se- 
cure in  the  oneness  of  faith  and  communion,  He  set 
Blessed  Peter  over  the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  and  fixed  in 
him  the  abiding  principle  of  this  two-fold  unity,  and  its 
visible  foundation,  in  the  strength  of  which  the  everlasting 
temple  should  arise  and  the  Church  in  the  firmness  of  that 
faith  should  lift  her  majestic  front  to  Heaven.*  And  see- 
ing that  the  gates  of  hell  with  daily  increase  of  hatred  are 
gathering  their  strength  on  every  side  to  upheave  the 
foundation  laid  by  God's  own  hand,  and  so,  if  that  might 
be,  to  overthrow  the  Church  :  We,  therefore,  for  the  pre- 
servation, safe-keeping,  and  increase  of  the  Catholic  flock, 
with  the  ajiproval  of  the  Sacred  Council,  do  judge  it  to  bo 
necessary  to  propose  to  the  behef  and  acceptance  of  all 
the  faithful,  in  accordance  with  the  ancient  and  constant 
faith  of  the  universal  Church,  the  doctrine  toucliing  the 
institution,  perpetuity,  and  natui*e  of  the  sacred  Apostolic 
Primacy,  in  which  is  found  the  strength  and  solidity  of  the 
entire  Church,  and  at  the  same  time  to  proscribe  and  con- 
demn the  contrary  errors,  so  hurtful  to  the  flock  of  Christ. 


CHAPTER  L 

OF  THE  INSTITUTION  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  PRIMACY  IN  BLESSED  PETER. 

AVe  therefore  teach  and  declare  that,  according  to  the 
testimony  of  the  Cospel,  the  primacy  of  jurisdiction  over 
the  universal  Church  of  God  was  immediately  and  directly 
promised  and  given  to  Blessed  Peter  the  Apostle  by  Clirist 
the  Lord.     For  it  was  to  Simon  alone,  to  whom  ho  had  al- 

*  From  Sermon  Iv.  chap.  11.  of  St.  Leo  the  Great,  A.  n.  440,  vol,  i,  p.  17 
of  edition  of  Ballorlni,  Venice,  1753 ;  reud  in  the  eighth  lecUoc  on  the 
Feast  of  St.  Peter's  Chair  at  Antioeh,  February  23. 


! 


I 


1 


232 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


■  *£;■ 


ready  said  :  Thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas,*  that  the  Lord 
after  the  confession  made  by  him,  saying  :  Thou  art  the 
Chi'ist,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  addressed  these  solemn 
words :  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Kar-Jonaj  because  flesh 
and  blood  have  not  revealed  it  to  thee,  but  my  Father  ^Yho 
is  in  Heaven.  And  I  say  to  thee  that  thou  art  Peter  ;  and 
upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,  and  the  gates  of 
hell  rihall  not  prevail  against  it.  And  I  will  give  to  thee 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  Heaven.  And  whatsoever  thou 
shalt  bind  upon  earth,  it  shall  be  bound  also  in  Heaven, 
and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  it  shall  be 
loosed  also  in  heaven.f  And  it  was  upon  Simon  alone 
that  Jesus  after  his  resurrection  bestowed  the  jurisdiction 
of  Chief  Pastor  and  liuler  over  all  His  fold  in  the  words : 
Peed  my  lambs :  feed  my  sheep. |  At  open  variance  with 
this  clear  doctrine  of  Holy  Scriptm'e  as  it  has  been  ever  un- 
derstood by  the  Catholic  Cliurch  are  the  perve?\se  oj^inious 
of  those  who,  while  they  distort  the  form  of  government 
established  by  Christ  the  Lord  in  His  Church,  deny  that 
Peter  in  his  single  person,  preferably  to  all  the  other  Apos- 
tles, whether  taken  sei^arately  or  together,  was  endowed 
by  Christ  with  a  true  and  proper  prunacy  of  jurisdiction  ; 
or  of  those  who  assert  that  the  same  primacy  was  not  be- 
stowed immediately  and  du'ectly  upon  Blessed  Peter  him- 
self, but  upon  the  Church,  and  through  the  Church  on 
Peter  as  her  Minister. 

If  any  one,  therefore,  shall  say  that  Blessed  Peter  the 
Apostle  was  not  appointed  the  Prince  of  all  the  Apostles 
and  the  visible  Head  of  tiio  whole  Church  Militant ;  or 
that  ti^e  same  directly  and  innuediately  received  from  the 
same  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  a  primacy  of  honor  only,  and 
not  of  true  and  proper  jurisdiction  ;  lot  him  bo  anathema. 


*  St.  John  1.  43,       +  St.  Matthew  xvi.  10-19.        t  St.  John  xxi.  15-1  < 


APPENDIX. 


233 


CHAPTER  n. 


ON  THE  PERPETUITY   OF   THE   PRIMACY  OF  BLESSED   PETER   IN   THE 

ROMAX  PONTIFFS. 

That  which  the  Prince  of  Shepherds  and  great  Shepherd 
of  the  sheep,  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  established  in  the 
person  of  the  Blessed  Apostle  Peter  to  secure  the  j)ei-pet- 
ual  welfare  and  lasting  good  of  the  Chiu'ch,  must,  by  the 
same  institution,  necessaiily  remain  unceasingly  in  the 
Church ;  which,  being  foimded  upon  the  Rock,  will  stand 
firm  to  the  end  of  the  world.  For  none  can  doubt,  and  it 
is  known  to  all  ages,  that  the  holy  and  Blessed  Peter,  the 
Prince  and  Chief  of  the  Apostles,  the  piUar  of  the  faith 
and  foundation  of  the  Cathohc  Church,  received  the  keys 
of  the  kingdom  from  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Saviour 
and  Redeemer  of  mankind,  and  lives,  presides,  and  judges, 
to  this  day  and  always,  in  his  successors  the  Bishops  of  the 
Holy  See  of  Rome,  which  was  founded  by  him,  and  conse- 
crated by  his  blood.*  Whence,  whosoever  succeeds  to 
Peter  in  this  See,  does  by  the  institution  of  Christ  HimseH 
obtain  the  Primacy  of  Peter  over  the  whole  Church,  The 
disposition  made  by  Incarnate  Truth  therefore  remains, 
and  Blessed  Peter,  abiding  through  the  strength  of  the 
Rock  in  the  power  that  he  received,  has  not  abandoned 
the  direction  of  the  Chm-ch.f  Wherefore  it  has  at  all 
times  been  necessary  that  every  particular  Church — that  is 
to  say,  the  faithful  throughout  the  world — should  agi'ce 
with  the  Roman  Church,  on  account  of  the gi^'atcr  author- 
ity of  the  princedom  which  this  has  received ;  that  all 
being  ansociated  in  the  unity  of  that  See  whence  the  rights 


*  From  the  Acts  (session  third)  of  the  Third  Goncrul  Council  of  Ephe- 
sui',  A.i).  4."1,  Luhhe's  Councils,  v(d.  iii.  i>.  lir)4,  Venice  cdilion  of  !T:2;3.  8co 
alio  letter  of  St.  Peter  Chrysologus  to  Eulyehes,  in  life  i)reli.\ed  to  hid 
works,  p.  v.],  Veniee,  1750. 

t  From  Sermon  iii.  chap.  iii.  of  St.  Leo  the  Great,  vol.  i.  p.  12. 


234 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


of  commuiiion  spread  to  all,  might  grow  together  as  mem- 
bers of  one  Head  in  the  com^^act  imity  of  the  body.* 

If  then,  any  should  deny  that  it  is  by  the  institution  of 
Christ  the  Lord,  or  by  divine  right,  that  Blessed  Peter 
should  have  a  perpetual  line  of  successors  in  the  Primacy 
over  the  Universal  Church,  or  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  is 
the  successor  of  Blessed  Peter  in  this  primacy ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 


'*  .1 


CHAPTER  m. 

ON  THE  POWER  AND  NATURE  OF  THE  PRIMACY  OP  THE  ROMAN 

PONTHT. 

"Wherefore,  resting  on  plain  testimonies  of  the  Sacred 
Writings,  and  adhering  to  the  plain  and  express  decrees 
both  of  our  predecessors,  the  Roman  Pontiffs,  and  of 
the  General  Councils,  We  renew  the  definition  of  the  Qi]c- 
umenical  Council  of  Florence,  in  virtue  of  which  all  the 
faithful  of  Christ  must  believe  that  the  Holy  Apostrlic  See 
and  the  Roman  Pontiff  possesses  the  primacy  over  the 
whole  world,  and  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  is  the  successor 
of  Blessed  Peter,  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  and  is  true  Vicar 
of  Christ,  and  Head  of  the  whole  Church,  and  Father  and 
Teacher  of  all  Christians ;  and  that  full  power  was  given 
to  him  in  Blessed  Peter  to  rule,  feed,  and  govern  the  Uni- 
versal Church  by  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord ;  as  is  also  con- 
tained in  the  acts  of  the  General  Councils  and  in  the 
Sacred  Canons. 

Hence  we  teach  and  declare  that  by  the  appointment  of 
our  Lord  the  Roman  Chui'ch  possesses  a  superiority  of  or- 
dinary power  over  all  other  Churches,  and  that  this  power 

*  From  St.  Ircnaeusagnliist  Heresies,  book  iii.  cap.  ill.  p.  175,  Benedict- 
ine edition,  Venice  I7;M ;  und  Acln  of  Synod  of  Aquilciu,  A.  D.  ijyi,  Lubbe's 
Councils,  vol.  ii.  p,  1185,  Venice,  1728. 


ii  iU 


il 


APPENDIX. 


235 


of  jurisdiction  of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  wliicli  is  tinily  epis- 
copal, is  immediate  ;  to  which  all,  of  whatever  rite  and  dig- 
nity, both  pastors  and  faithful,  both  indi\ddually  and  col- 
lectively, are  bound,  by  their  duty  of  hierarchial  subordin- 
ation and  true  obedience,  to  submit  not  only  in  matters 
which  belong  to  faith  and  morals,  but  also  in  those  that  ai> 
pertain  to  the  discipliue  and  government  of  the  Church 
throughout  the  world,  so  that  the  Church  of  Clirist  may 
be  one  flock  under  one  supreme  pastor  through  the  preser- 
vation of  unity  both  of  communion  and  of  profession  of 
the  same  i'aith  with  the  Roman  Pontiff.  This  is  the  teach- 
ing of  Catholic  truth,  from  which  no  one  can  deviate  with- 
out loss  of  faith  and  of  salvation. 

But  so  far  is  this  power  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff  from 
being  any  prejudice  to  the  ordinary-  and  immediate  power 
of  episcopal  jurisdiction,  by  wliicli  BishoiDS,  who  have  been 
set  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  succeed  and  hold  the  place  of 
the  Apostles,*  feed  and  govern,  each  his  own  flock,  as  true 
Pastors,  that  tliis  their  episcopal  authority  is  reaUy 
asserted,  strengthened,  and  protected  by  the  supreme  and 
universal  Pastor ;  in  accordance  with  the  words  of  St. 
Gregory  the  Great ;  my  honor  is  the  honor  of  the  wholo 
Church.  My  honor  is  the  firm  strength  of  my  brethren. 
I  am  truly  honored,  when  the  honor  due  to  each  and  all 
is  not  withheld,  f 

Further,  from  this  supreme  power  possessed  by  the 
l^oman  Pontiff  of  governing  the  Universal  Churoh,  it  fol- 
lows that  he  has  the  right  of  free  communication  ^\*ith  the 
Pastors  of  the  wholo  Church,  and  with  their  flocks,  that 
these  may  bo  taught  and  iTded  by  him  in  the  way  of  sal- 
vation. Wherefore  we  condemn  and  reject  the  opinions 
of  those  who  hold  that  the  communication  bet'veen  this 


I 


*  From  chap.  iv.  of  xxiii.  Bcssion  of  Council  of  Trent,  "Of  the  Eccleei- 
astical  Hierarchy." 

t  From  tlic  letters  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  book  viii.  30,  vol.  li.  p. 
919,  Beucdictiue  edition,  Paris,  17o5. 


236 


THE  ^ATICAN   COUNCIL. 


r  >  \ 


v\ 


m- 


supreme  Head  and  the  Pastors  and  their  flocks  can  law- 
fully be  impeded ;  or  who  make  this  communication  sub- 
ject to  the  will  of  the  secular  power,  so  as  to  maintain  that 
whatever  is  done  by  the  Apostolic  See,  or  by  its  authority, 
for  the  government  of  the  Church,  cannot  have  force  or 
value  imless  it  be  confirmed  by  the  assent  of  the  secular 
power.  And  since  by  the  divine  right  of  Apostohc 
primacy,  the  Roman  Pontiff  is  jjlaced  over  the  Universal 
Chm'ch,  we  fui'ther  teach  and  declare  that  he  is  the 
supreme  judge  of  the  faithful,*  and  that  in  all  causes,  the 
decision  of  which  belongs  to  the  Church,  recourse  may  bo 
had  to  his  tribunal  ,f  and  that  none  may  re-open  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Apostolic  See,  than  whose  authority  there  is 
no  greater,  nor  can  any  lawfully  review  its  judgment.  J 
Wherefore  they  err  from  the  right  coui'se  who  assert  that 
it  is  lawful  to  apjieal  from  the  judgments  of  the  Roman 
Pontiffs  to  an  Oecumenical  Council,  as  to  an  authority 
higher  than  that  of  the  Roman  Pontiff. 

If  then  any  shall  say  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  has  the 
office  merely  of  inspection  or  du'ection,  and  not  full  and 
supreme  power  of  jurisdiction  over  the  Universal  Church, 
not  only  in  things  which  belong  tc  %ith  and  morals,  but 
also  in  those  which  relate  to  the  discipHne  and  government 
of  the  Church  spread  throughout  the  world  ;  or  assert  that 
he  possesses  merely  the  principal  part,  and  not  all  the  full- 
ness of  this  supreme  power  ;  or  that  this  power  which  he 
enjoys  is  not  ordinary  and  immediate,  both  over  each  and 
all  the  Churches  and  over  each  and  all  the  Pastors  and  the 
faithful ;  let  him  be  anathema. 


Ik  L 


*  From  a  Brief  of  Pius  VI.  Super  soUdihite,  of  November  28, 17SG. 

t  From  the  Acts  of  tlie  Fourteenth  General  Couueil  of  Lyons,  A.  D. 
127-i.     Labbu's  Councils  vol.  xiv.  p.  hVl. 

t  From  Letter  viii.  of  Pope  Nicholas  I.,  a.d.  H^S,  to  the  Emperor 
Michael,  in  Labbo's  Councils,  vol.  ix.  pp.  I'd'd'd  and  15T0. 


APPENDIX. 


237 


CHAPTER  rv. 


CONCERNING    THE    INFALLIBLE    TEACHING     OF    THE    EOILVN 

PONTIFF. 

INIoreover,  tliat  tlie  supreme  power  of  teacliirg  is  also  in- 
cluded in  the  Apostolic  primacy,  which  the  Rotnan  Pontiff, 
as  the  successor  of  I'eter,  Prmce  of  the  Aj)ostles,  possesses 
over  the  whole  Church,  this  Holy  See  has  always  held,  the 
per[)otual  practice  of  the  Church  confirms,  and  (Ecumenical 
Councils  also  have  declared,  especially  those  in  which  the 
East  with  the  West  met  in  the  union  of  faith  and  charity. 
For  the  Fathers  of  the  Fourth  Council  of  Constantinople, 
following  in  the  footsteps  of  their  predecessors,  gave  forth 
this  solemn  j^rofession  :  The  first  condition  of  salvation  is 
to  keep  the  rule  of  the  true  faith.  And  because  the 
sentence  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  cannot  be  passed  by 
who  said:  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  Rock  I  will 
build  my  Church,*  these  things  which  have  been  said  are 
approved  by  events,  because  in  the  Apostolic  See  the 
Catholic  Rehgion  and  her  hoty  and  well-known  doctrine 
has  always  been  liept  undefiled.  Desiring,  therefore,  not 
to  be  in  the  least  degi*ee  sept.,  ated  from  the  faith  and  doc- 
trine of  that  See,  we  lio])e  that  we  may  deserve  to  be  in  the 
one  communion,  which  the  Apostolic  See  preaches,  in 
which  is  the  entii'e  and  true  soHdity  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion.f  And,  with  the  approval  of  the  Second  Council  of 
Lyons,  the  Greeks  professed  that  the  Holy  Roman  Chui'ch 
enjoys  supreme  and  full  Primacy  and  preeminence  over  the 
whole  Catholic  Church,  which  it  truly  and  humbly  ac- 
knowledges that  it  has  received  with  the  plenitude  of 
power  from  oiu*  Lord  Himself  in  the  person  of  blessed 

*  St.  Matthew  xvi.  18. 

+  From  the  Formula  of  St.  Hormisdag,  suhscribed  by  the  Fathers  of 
the  Eighth  General  Council  (Fourth  of  Coustantinople),  a.d.  869. 
Labbd's  Councils,  vol.  v.  pp.  583,  622. 


f^! 


238 


THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


Peter,  Prince  or  Head  of  the  Apostles,  whose  successor  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is ;  and  as  the  Apostohc  See  is  bound  be- 
fore all  others  to  defend  the  truth  of  faith,  so  also  if  any 
questions  regarding  faith  shall  arise,  they  must  be  defined 
by  its  judgment.*  Finally,  the  Council  of  Florence  de- 
fined: f  That  the  Eoman  Pontiff  is  the  true  Vicar  of 
Christ,  and  the  Head  of  the  whole  Church,  and  the  Father 
and  Teacher  of  all  Christians;  and  that  to  hun  in  blessed 
Peter  was  delivered  by  om*  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the  full 
power  of  feeding,  ruling,  and  governing  the  whole 
Church.t 

To  satisfy  this  pastoral  duty  our  predecessors  ever  made 
unwearied  efforts  that  the  salutary  doctrine  of  Christ  might 
be  propagated  among  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  with 
equal  care  watched  that  it  might  be  preserved  genuine  and 
pure  where  it  had  been  received.  Therefore  the  Bishops 
of  the  whole  world,  now  singly,  now  assembled  in  synod, 
following  the  long-estabhshed  custom  of  Churches, §  and 
the  form  of  the  ancient  rule,||  sent  word  to  this  Apostolic 
See  of  those  dangers  especially  which  sprang  up  in  matters 
of  faith,  that  there  the  losses  of  faith  might  be  most 
effectually  repaired  where  the  faith  camiot  fail.^  And  the 
Roman  Pontiffs,  according  to  the  exigencies  of  times  and 
circumstances,  sometimes  assembling  OEcumenical  Coun- 
cils, or  asking  for  the  nrind  of  the  Church  scattered 
throughout  the  world,  sometimes  by  particular  Synods, 
sometimes  using  other  helps  which  Divine  Providence  sup- 

*  From  the  Acts  of  tbc  Fourteenth  General  Council  (Second  of  Lyons), 
A.D.  1274.    Labbi',  vol  xiv.  p.  513. 

t  From  the  Acts  of  the  Seventeenth  General  Council  of  Florence,  a.d. 
1438.     Livbbe,  vol.  xviii.  p.  520. 

X  John  xxi.  15-17. 

§  From  a  letter  of  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  to  Pope  St.  Celestinc  I.,  a.d. 
422,  vol.  vi.  part  ii.  p.  of),  Paris  edition  of  1038. 

1  From  a  Rescript  of  St.  Innocent  I.  to  the  Council  of  Milcvis,  A.n. 
403.    Labbc,  vol.  iii.  p.  47. 

IT  From  a  letter  of  St.  Bernard  to  Pope  Innocent  II.  a.d.  1130,  Epist. 
191,  vol.  iv.  p.  433,  Paris  edition  of  1742. 


APPENDIX. 


239 


plied,  defined  as  to  be  held  those  things  which  with  the 
help  of  God  they  had  recognized  as  conformable  with  the 
Sacred  Scriptures  and  Apostolic  Traditions.  For  the 
Holy  Spirit  was  not  promised  to  the  successors  of  Peter 
that  by  His  revelation  they  might  make  known  new 
doctrine,  but  that  by  Ilis  assistance  they  might  inviolably 
keep  and  faithfully  expound  the  revelation  or  deposit  of 
faith  delivered  through  the  Apostles.  And  indeed  all  the 
venerable  Fathers  have  embraced  and  the  holy  orthodox 
Doctors  have  venerated  and  foU(  ,ed  their  Apostolic  doc- 
trine ;  knowing  most  fuUy  that  this  See  of  holy  Peter  re- 
mauis  ever  free  from  all  blemish  of  error  according  to  the 
divine  promise  of  the  Lord  our  Saviour  made  to  the  Prince 
of  Ilis  disciples  :  I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail 
not,  and,  when  thou  art  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren.* 

This  gift,  then,  of  truth  and  never-failing  faith  was  con- 
ferred by  heaven  upon  Peter  and  his  successors  in  this 
Chair,  that  they  might  perform  their  high  office  for  the  sal- 
vation of  ail ;  that  the  whole  flock  of  Christ  kept  away  by 
them  from  the  poisonous  food  of  error,  might  be  nour- 
ished with  the  pasture  of  heavenly  doctrine ;  that  the  oc- 
casion of  schism  being  removed  the  whole  Church  might 
be  kept  one,  and,  resting  on  its  foundation,  might  stand 
firm  against  the  gates  of  hell 

But  since  in  this  very  age,  in  which  the  salutary  efficacy 
of  the  Apostohc  office  is  most  of  all  required,  not  a  few  are 
found  who  take  away  from  its  authority,  we  judge  it  alto- 
gether necessary  solemnly  to  assert  the  prerogative  which 
the  only-begotten  Son  of  God  vouchsafed  to  join  with  the 
supreme  pastoral  office. 

Therefore  faithfully  adhering  to  the  tradition  received 
fi'om  the  beginning  of  the  Cliristian  faith,-  for  the  glory  of 
God  Our  Saviour,  the  exaltation  of  the  Catholic  Religion, 
and  the  salvation  of  Christian  peoi^le,  the  Sacred  Coimcil 


*  St.  Luke  xxii.  33.    See  also  the  Acts  of  the  Sixth  General  Council, 
A.D.  680.    Labbe  vol.  vii.  p.  659, 


240 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


ajiproving,  We  teach  and  define  that  it  is  a  dogma  divinely 
revealed  :  that  the  Eoman  Pontiff,  when  he  speaks  ex 
cathedra,  that  is,  when  in  discharge  of  the  office  of  Pastor 
and  Doctor  of  all  Christians,  by  vu'tue  of  his  supveme 
Apostolic  authority  he  defines  a  doctrine  regarding  faith  or 
morals  to  be  held  by  the  Universal  Church,  by  the  divine 
assistance  promised  to  him  in  blessed  Peter,  is  possessed  of 
that  infalhbility  with  which  the  divine  Redeemer  Vvilled 
that  His  Church  should  be  endowed  for  defining  doctrine 
regarding  faith  or  morals :  and  that  therefore  such 
definitions  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  are  u'reformable  *  of  them- 
selves, and  not  from  the  consent  of  the  Church. 

But  if  any  one — which  may  God  avert — presume  ^o  con- 
tradict this  Oui  definition ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

Gi^en  at  Rome  in  Public  Session  solemnly  field  in  the 
Vatican  Basilica  in  (he  year  of  Our  Lord  one  thousand 
eight  Inmdicd  and  seventy,  on  the  eighteenth  day  of 
July,  in  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  our  Pontificate. 

In  confurmify  ivith  the  original. 

Joseph,  Bishop  of  S.  Polien, 

Secretary  to  the  Vatican  Council. 


RULES  LAID  DOWN  BY    THEOLOfilANS  FOR  DOCTRINAL 

DEFINITIONS. 

Question. — What  arc  the  characters  and  marks  whereby 
•wo  may  know  whether  a  propositicm  can  be  submitted  to 
the  autlioritative  judgment  of  the  Catholic  magistorium,  or 

*  i.*".  in  the  words  used  by  Popo  Nicholas  I.  note  13,  nnd  in  the  Synod 
of  (iucdlinburf;',  A. n.  lOSf),  "it  ia  allowed  to  none  to  revise  its  jii(lf;;nient, 
and  to  Bit  iu  judgment  uj.)ou  what  it  has  judged."  Labbu,  vol.  xii.  p. 
679. 


APPENDIX. 


241 


or 


in  other  words,  whether  a  proposition  be  definable  as  de 
fide? 

Answer. — In  the  answer  distinction  was  made  between 
that  wluch  was  sufficient  in  order  to  come  to  a  definition, 
and  that  which  was  not  necessary  for  that  purpose. 

With  respect  to  that  Avhich  was  not  necessary,  the  fol- 
lowing four  points  were  established  unanimously. 

1.  It  is  not  necessary,  that  antecedently  there  should  not 
have  been  a  variety  of  opinions  in  the  Catholic  Church,  and 
that  aU  should  havt  agreed  in  that  which  is  to  be  defined. 

This  is  manifest  from  the  ancient  controversy  long  ago 
decided  on  re-baptism,  although  many  bishops  held  the 
opposite  opmion.  This  is  also  confii'med  by  the  practice 
of  the  church,  which  many  times  has  permitted  the  pro- 
fession of  opi^osite  opinions,  provided  there  has  been  a 
wilUngncss  to  submit  fo  any  decision  that  might  be  made. 
This  practice  supposes  that  points  may  be  defined,  about 
which  Cathohcs  have  been  permitted  to  think  and  dis- 
pute freely. 

2.  It  is  not  necessary  that  no  writers  of  authority  should 
be  cited  for  an  opinion  contrary  to  that  which  is  to  be 
defined.  This  is  manifest  from  the  history  of  the  dog- 
mas successively  defined;  and  in  this  place  it  will  bo 
sufficient  to  observe,  that  the  Council  of  Trent  (sess.  vi. 
can.  23)  did  not  hesitate  to  affirm  as  the  faith  of  the 
chui'ch,  that  the  most  Holy  Virgin  Mother  of  God  had 
never  committed  any  even  venial  sin,  although  it  is  cer- 
tain that  grave  doctors  and  Fathers  wrote  otherwise. 

3.  It  is  not  necessary  to  cite  texts,  either  implicit  or 
exphcit,  from  Holy  Scripture,  since  it  is  manifest  that 
the  extent  of  revelation  is  greater  than  that  of  Holy 
Scripture.  Thus,  it  has  been  defined,  for  example,  that 
even  infants  may  and  ought  to  be  baptized,  that  Christ 
our  Lord  is  wholly  contained  and  received  under  one 
species  of  the  most  Holy  Eucharist,  that  the  Holy  (J host 
proceeds   from    tho   Father   and   the   Son   as   fi'om  one 

II 


« 


'  .flirs 


i    !* 


242 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


principle,  alhoup^li  theologians  do  not  produce  texts 
either  implicit  or  explicit  fi*om  Scripture  in  which  such 
dogmas  are  taught. 

4.  Lastly,  it  is  not  necessary  to  have  a  series  of  fathers 
and  testimoni'is  reaching  to  apostolic  times,  in  order  to 
prove  that  such  a  proposition  belongs  to  apostolic  tradition. 
With  respect  to  this,  it  was  observed,  that  the  assertion  of 
Buch  a  necessity  rests  upon  false  hypotheses,  and  is  refuted 
by  the  most  palpable  facts. 

The  false  hypotheses  are, 

a.  That  all  doctrine  preached  fi'om  the  beginning  has 
been  committed  to  ^n'iting  by  the  fathers. 

6.  That  all  the  monuments  of  antiquity  have  come  down 
to  us. 

c.  That  the  entire  object  of  faith  has  always  been  dis- 
tinctly conceived  and  formally  expressed; 

d.  That  subsequent  tradition  may  differ  from  the  pre- 
ceduig ; 

e.  That  it  cannot  bo  legitimately  concluded  fi'om  the  fact 
that  a  doctrine  is  held  in  any  age,  that  the  same  doctiine 
was  never  denied  by  the  majority,  and  that  it  was  at  least 
impUcitly  beUevcd  by  the  greater  number. 

The  facts  that  refute  such  a  necessity  are  manifold,  but 
it  suffices  to  mention  the  definition  of  Epliesus,  of  Chal- 
cedon,  of  the  Latcran  Synod  under  Martin  I.  or  the  dog- 
matical letters  of  St.  Leo  and  St.  Agatlio,  in  which  appeal 
is  made  to  the  faith  of  the  fatlicrs  and  to  tradition,  and 
where  there  appears  to  be  no  anxiety  to  produce  testimonies 
of  the  lii'st  three  centui'ies,  on  the  contraiy,  authors  aro 
quoted,  who  m  tlioso  tunes  were  of  recent  date. 

Having  thus  laid  down  by  common  agreement  that 
which  was  not  necessary,  they  passed  on  to  discuss  what 
was  sufficient  in  order  that  an  opinion  should  be  defined 
as  an  article  of  faith. 

The  five  following  characters  were  proposed  and  decided 
upon  as  being  sufficient. 


f     ,' 


APPENDIX. 


243 


texts 
such 


L  A  certain  number  of  grave  testimonies  containing  tho 
controverted  proposition. 

This  after  thorough  discussion  was  unanimously  ac- 
knowledged to  be  a  sufficient  character,  and  it  was  said 
that  to  deny  it  would  be  going  against  the  councils,  the 
dogmatic  bulls  of  pontiffs,  and  the  economy  of  the  church 
itself.  Thus  with  a  certain  number  of  such  testimonies 
referred  to  in  the  acts  of  the  councils,  it  is  easily  seen  how 
the  fathers  proceeded  to  a  definition  at  Ephesus  against 
Nestorius,  in  the  sixth  councU  against  the  Monothelites, 
and  in  the  seventh  against  the  Iconoclasts. 

n.  One  or  more  revealed  principles  in  which  is  contained 
the  proposition  in  question. 

Upon  this  also  the  consultors  were  unanimous,  and  they 
moreover  said  that  the  production  of  such  principles  would 
be  equivalent  to  a  virtual  and  immediate  revelation.  Thus, 
from  the  revealed  principle  that  Jesus  Christ  is  perfect  God 
and  perfect  man,  it  follows  as  revealed  that  Jesus  Christ 
has  two  wills :  also,  in  the  revealed  principle  that  God  is 
One  and  the  Divine  Persou,s  three,  and  that  all  in  God  is 
one  except  where  the  relation  of  origin  intervenes,  it  is  also 
revealed  that  the  Holy  Ghost  can  only  proceed  from  the 
Father  and  the  Son  as  fi'om  one  principle  of  spiration. 

in.  The  intimate  nexus  of  the  dogmas,  or,  what  is  the 
same  thing,  that  a  proposition  must  be  believed  to  be  re- 
vealed, from  the  denial  of  which  the  falsity  of  one  or  more 
articles  of  faith  would  necessarily  and  immediately  follow. 

The  consultors  were  unanimous  on  this  point,  agreeing 
that  such  a  character  was  equivalent  to  a  virtual  and  im- 
mediate revelation.  Thus,  when  it  is  estabhshcd  that  some 
sins  are  mortal,  and  that  not  every  sin  is  incompatible  with 
a  state  of  grace,  it  necessarily  follows  that  the  distinction 
between  mortal  and  venial  sins  is  a  revealed  doctrine.  So 
also  from  the  fact  that  the  Sacraments  i)roduco  their  effect 
ex  opere  opcralo  ajnd  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  primary  min- 
ister of  them,  it  follows  as  vii-tuolly  and  immediately  re- 


244 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL, 


M  I 


M  I 


■  'i 


H 


U 

'J 


vealed,  that  the  effect  of  the  Sacraments  does  not  depend 
upon  the  virtue  or  malice  of  the  secondary  minister. 

rV.  The  concordant  testimony  of  the  existing  episcopate. 

The  cousultors  with  regard  to  this  were  again  unanimous, 
and  it  was  said  that  to  deny  the  sufficiency  of  this  charac- 
ter was  to  contradict  the  promises  of  oiur  Lord,  and  the 
constant  practice  of  the'fathers  in  proving  the  articles  of 
faith.  Thus  Irentcus,  TertuUian,  Augustine,  and  Fulgen- 
tius,  in  order  to  put  an  end  to  controversies,  considered  it 
sufficient  to  ascertain  the  faith  of  the  Sees  and  more  espe- 
cially the  chief  ones. 

V.  The  practice  of  the  Church. 

That  this  point  would  afford  sufficient  evidence  to  pro- 
ceed to  a  delinition,  was  likewise  imanimously  affirmed  by 
the  consultors. 


VI. 


THE  CASE  OF  HONORIUS. 

I  HAVii  intentionally  refrained  fi'om  treating  the  historical 
evidence  in  the  case  of  Honorius  in  the  text  of  the  fomth 
chapter,  for  the  following  reasons  : 

1.  Because  it  is  sufficient  to  the  argument  of  that  chapter 
to  affii'm  that  the  case  of  Honorius  is  doubtful.  It  is  in 
vain  for  the  antagonists  of  Papal  Infallibility  to  quote  this 
case  as  if  it  were  certain.  Centuries  of  controversy  have 
established,  beyond  contradiction,  that  the  accusatiou 
agamst  Honorius  cannot  bo  raised  Ijy  his  most  ardent  an- 
tagonists to  more  than  a  probabilily.  ^\nd  tbis  probability, 
at  its  maxiiuum,  is  less  than  that  of  his  defence.  I  tlicre- 
fore  allum  the  question  to  be  doubtful;  whii'h  is  abundantly 
sufficient  against  the  private  judgment  of  his  accusers.  Tho 


APPENDIX. 


)end 

bate. 

lous, 
|ara,c- 
tho 
^sof 
/gen- 
::d  it 
fspe- 


245 


cumulus  of  evidence  for  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pon- 
tiff outweighs  all  such  doubts. 

2.  Because  the  argument  of  the  fourth  chapter  neces- 
sarily excludes  all  discussion  of  detailed  facts.  Had  they 
been  introduced  into  the  text,  our  antagonists  would  have 
evaded  the  point,  and  confused  the  argument  by  a  discus- 
sion of  details.  I  wUl,  nevertheless,  here  affirm,  that  the 
following  points  in  the  case  of  Honorius  can  be  abmidantly 
proved  from  documents  : 

(1)  That  Honorius    defined    no    doctrine   whatsoever. 

(2)  That  he  forbade  the  making  of  any  new  definition. 

(3)  That  his  fault  was  precisely  in  this  omission  of 
Apostolic   authority,  for  which  he   was  justly  censured. 

(4)  That  his  two  epistles  are  entirely  orthodox ;  though, 
in  the  use  of  language,  he  wrote  as  was  usual  before  the 
condemnation  of  Monothelitism,  and  not  as  it  became 
necessary  afterwards.  It  is  an  anachronism  and  an  injus- 
tice to  censure  his  language,  used  before  that  condemnation, 
as  it  might  be  just  to  censure  it  after  the  condemnation  had 
been  made. 

To  this  I  add  the  following  excellent  passage  from  the 
recent  Pastoral  of  the  Archbishop  of  Baltimore  : 


"The  case  of  Honorius  forms  no  exception;  for  1st, 
Honorius  expressly  says  in  his  letters  to  Sergius,  that  he 
meant  to  define  nothing,  and  he  was  condemned  precisely 
because  he  temporized  and  would  not  define;  2nd,  because 
in  his  letters  he  clearly  taught  the  sound  Catholic  doctrine, 
only  enjoining  silence  as  to  the  use  of  ceriain  terms,  then 
new  in  the  Church;  and  3rd,  because  his  letters  wore  not 
addressed  to  a  general  council  of  the  whole  Church,  and 
were  rather  private,  than  public  and  official;  at  least  they 
were  not  pubhshod,  even  in  the  East,  until  several  years 
later.  The  Ib'st  letter  was  written  to  Sergius  in  G33,  and 
eight  years  afterwards,  in  641,  the  Emi^eror  Heraclius,  in 


246 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


exculpating  himself  to  Pope  John  II.,  Honorius'  successor, 
for  having  publislicd  his  edict — the  Ecthesis — which  enjoin- 
ed silence  on  the  disputants,-  similar  to  that  imposed  by 
Honorius,  lays  the  whole  responsibihty  thereof  on  Sergius, 
who  he  declares,  composed  the  edict.  Evidently,  Sergius 
had  not  communicated  the  letter  to  the  Emperor,  probably 
because  its  contents,  if  published,  -would  not  have  suited 
his  wUy  purpose  of  secretly  introducing,  under  another 
form,  the  Eutcyhian  heresy.  Thus  foils  to  the  ground  the 
only  case  upon  which  the  opponents  of  InfaUibUity  have 
continued  to  insist.  This  entire  subject  has  been  exhausted 
by  many  recent  learned  writers." 

On  the  question  of  Vii'gilius,  see  Cardinal  Orsi  De  irre- 
formahUi  Rom.  Pont,  indefinicndis  fidei  controversiis  judicio, 
tom.  i.  p.  i.  capp.  19,  20;  Jercmias  a  Benetti's  Primlcg,  S. 
Petri  vindic.  p.  ii.  tom.  v.  art.  12,  p.  397,  ed.  Roman.  1759; 
BaUerini  De  vi  et  ratione  primalus^  cap.  15;  Lud.  Thomassin, 
Diap.  xix.  in  Concil. ;  Petr.  De  ^larca  Diss,  de  Vigilio  ; 
Vincen2a  in  S.  Gregorii  Nyss.  et  Origenis  scripta  cum  App. 
de  actis  Synodi  V.  tom.  iv.  and  v. 

On  the  question  of  Honorius,  amongst  older  writers: 
los.  Biner  S.  J.  in  Apparatu  eruditionis,  p.  iii.  iv.  and  xi. ; 
Orsi,  op.  cit.  capp.  21-28;  Bellarm.  De  Rom.  Pont  if.  liv.  iv. ; 
Thomassin,  op.  cit.  diss.  xx. ;  Natalis  Alex.  Hist.  Eccks. 
Saec.  VII.  diss.  2.;  Zaccaria  Antifebrom.  p,  ii.  lib.  iv. 
Amongst  later  authors,  see  Civilta  cattolica,  aim.  18G4,  ser. 
V.  vol.  xi.  and  xii. ;  Schneeman,  Studia  in  qu,  de  Honorio  ; 
los.  Pennachi  de  Honorii  I.  Romani  Pontijicis  causa  in  Con- 
cilia VI. 


APPENDIX. 


247 


vn. 


PASTORAL  OF  THE  GERMAN  BISHOPS  ASSEMBLEI>  AT 

rULDA. 

"  The  uudersigued  Bishops  to  the  reverend  clergy  and 
faithful,  meeting,  and  peace  in  the  Lord. 

"  Having  returned  to  our  respective  Dioceses  from  the 
Holy  (Ecumenical  Council  of  the  Vatican,  we,  in  union 
with  other  German  Bislioi)3  who  were  prevented  attending 
the  Council,  consider  it  oiu'  duty  as  yoiu*  chief  pastors  to 
address  to  you,  dearly  beloved  in  the  Lord,  a  few  words  of 
instruction  and  exliortation.  The  occasion  and  reason  for 
our  doing  so,  and  that  unitedly  and  solemnly,  is  found  in 
the  fact  that  many  erroneous  ideas  have  for  several  months 
been  disseminated,  and  still,  without  any  authority,  are 
strivmg  in  many  places  to  gain  acceptance. 

"In  order,  then,  to  maintain  the  divine  truths  which 
Christ  our  Lord  hath  taught  mankind  in  their  entire  pur- 
ity, and  to  seciu'e  them  from  all  change  and  distortion,  He 
has  estabhshed  in  His  Holy  Church  the  office  of  infallible 
teaching,  and  has  promised  and  also  given  to  it  His  protec- 
tion and  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost  for  aU  tunes. 
On  this  office  of  infalUble  teaching  of  the  Church  reposes 
entire  the  security  and  joy  of  oiu*  faith. 

"  As  often  as  in  the  course  of  time  misunderstandings  of 
or  oppositions  to,  individual  points  of  teaching  have  sprung 
up,  this  office  of  infalhble  teachuig  has  m  various  ^^•ays,  at  one 
time  m  greater  Comicils,  at  anotlier  without  them,  both 
exposed  and  foiled  the  eiTors,  ajid  declared  and  established 
the  truth.  This  has  been  done  in  the  most  solemn  man- 
lier by  the  General  Councils,  that  is,  by  those  great  assem- 
blies in  which  the  Head  and  the  members  of  the  one  teach- 
ing body  of  the  Churcli  combined  for  the  decidhig  of  the 
doubts  and  controversies  in  matters  of  faith  wliich  then 
prevailed. 


J 


248 


THE  VATICAN   COUXCIi.. 


"These  decisions,  according  to  the  unanimous  and  un< 
doubted  tradition  of  the  Church,  have  always  been  held  to 
be  preserved  from  error  by  a  supemi^^uial  and  divine  as- 
sistance. Hence  the  faithful  in  all  times  ha':e  submitted 
themselves  to  these  decisions  as  to  the  infallible  expres- 
sions of  the  Ho'y  Ghost  Himself,  and,  -with  undoubting 
faith,  have  held  them  to  be  true.  They  have  done  so,  not, 
as  persons  might  suppose,  because  tlici  Bishops  were  men 
of  mature  and  extended  experience,  n<;t  because  many  of 
them  were  versed  in  all  sciences,  not  because  they  had  come 
together  from  all  pai'ts  of  the  world,  and  tht  'eforo,  in  a  cer- 
tain sense,  brought  together  the  human  knowledge  of  tho 
whole  earth  ;  not,  lascly,  because  through  a  long  life  they 
iiad  :,tudiod  and  taught  the  Word  of  God,  and  hence  were 
trustworthy  witnesses  of  its  meaning.  All  this  indeed 
gives  to  their  declarations  a  very  high,  indeed  perhaj^s  the 
highest  possible,  degree  of  mere  human  trustworthiness. 
Still  this  is  not  a  sufficient  ground  on  which  to  rest  super- 
natural faith.  For  this  act,  in  its  last  resort,  rests  not  on 
the  testimony  of  men,  even  when  they  are  most  worthy  of 
confidence,  and  even  if  the  whole  human  race  bv  the  voice 
of  its  best  and  most  noble  rej)resentati\'es  should  bear  wit- 
ness to  it ;  but  such  an  act  always  rests  wholly  and  'lono 
on  the  truth  of  God  Himself.  When  therefore  the  chil- 
dren of  the  Church  receive  with  faith  the  decrees  of  a  Gen- 
eral Council,  thev  do  it  with  a  conviction  ihat  God  the 
Eternal  and  alone  of  Himself  Infallible  Tnith  co-operated 
with  it  in  a  supernatural  manner,  and  presei-vcs  it  from 
error. 

"  Such  a  Gfjneral  Coimcil  is  the  present  one  wliich  our 
Holy  Father  Pius  IX.,  as  you  know,  convoked  in  Rome, 
and  to  which  the  successors  of  the  Apostles,  in  larger  num- 
bers than  ever  before,  have  hastened  from  all  parts  of  tho 
world,  that  the;'  might,  with  the  successor  of  St.  Peter  and 
undpr  his  guidance,  consult  for  the  present  urgent  interests 
of  the  Church.     After  many  and  serious  debates  the  Holy 


APPENDIX. 


249 


Father,  in  Tirtue  of  his  Apostolical  authority  as  teacher,  on 
April  24  and  July  1 8  of  this  year,  with  the  consent  of  the 
holy  Council,  solemnly  published  sevv^ral  decrees  relating 
to  the  true  doctrine  about  faith,  the  Church,  and  its  su- 
preme head. 

"  By  tliis  means,  then,  the  infallible  teaching  authority 
of  the  Church  has  decreed,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  by  the 
vicar  of  Chiist  and  the  Episcopate  united  with  him  has 
spoken :  and  therefore  all,  whether  Bishops,  priests  or  lay- 
men, are  bound  to  receive  their  degrees  as  di%dnely  reveal- 
ed truths,  and  with  joyful  hearts  lay  hold  of  them,  and 
confess  the  same,  if  they  wish  to  be  and  remain  true  mem- 
bers of  the  one  Holy  Catholic  and  ApostoHc  Chui'ch. 
When,  then,  beloved  in  the  Lord,  objections  are  raised, 
and  you  hear  it  maintained  that  the  Vatican  Council  is 
no  true  General  Council,  and  that  its  decisions  are  of 
no  authority,  do  not  allow  yourselves  to  be  led  astray 
thereby,  so  as  to  falter  in  your  devotion  to  the  Church 
and  in  your  belief  and  acceptance  of  its  decrees;  for 
such  objections  are  wholl}'  unfounded. 

"  Bound  together  m  the  unity  of  faith  and  ]ovo  with  the 
Pope,  have  the  assembled  Bishops,  both  those  "■  iho  in  Chris- 
tifin  lands  administer  well-establislied  sees,  and  also  those 
who  are  called  to  extend  the  Kingdom  of  God  among  the 
heathen  in  apostolic  poverty,  Bishops,  whether  they  tend  a 
larger  or  a  smaller  flock — these,  as  legitimate  successors 
of  the  Apostles,  have  all  with  the  same  right  taken  part  in 
the  Council,  and  maturely  considered  everything. 

"  As  long  as  the  discussions  lasted,  the  Bishops,  as  their 
consciences  demanded,  and  as  became  their  office,  expressed 
their  views  plainly  and  openly,  and  with  all  necessary 
freedom  ;  and,  as  was  only  to  be  expected  in  an  assembly 
of  nearly  800  Fathers,  many  difterences  of  opinion  were 
manifested.  These  diflerenccs  of  oj)inion  can  in  no  way 
aflfect  the  authoiity  of  the  decrees  themselves  ;  should 
even  we  not  take  into  consideration  the  fact,  that  almo^ 


'■  ,« 


250 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


the  entire  body  of  the  Bishops  who,  at  the  time  of  the 
Public  Session,  still  maintained  an  opposite  opinion,  ab- 
stained in  the  said  Session  from  expressing  dissent. 

'•  However,  to  maintain  that  either  the  one  or  the  other 
of  tha  doctrines  decided  by  the  General  Coimcil  are  not 
contained  in  the  Holy  Scripture,  and  in  tradition  of  the 
Church — those  two  sources  of  the  Catholic  faith — or  that 
they  are  even  in  opposition  to  the  same,  is  a  first  stop, 
irreconcilable  with  the  primary  principles  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  wliich  leads  to  separation  from  her  communion. 
"Wherefore,  we  hereby  declare  that  the  present  Vatican 
Council  is  a  legitimate  General  Council ;  and,  moreover, 
that  this  Council,  as  Uttle  as  any  other  General  Council, 
has  propounded  or  formed  a  new  doctrine  at  variance  with 
the  ancient  teaching  ;  but  that  it  has  simply  developed  and 
thrown  light  upon  the  old  and  faithfuUy-preserved  truth 
contained  in  the  deposit  of  faith,  and  in  oj:)position  to  the 
cn'ors  of  the  day  has  proposed  it  expressly  to  the  belief  of 
all  the  faithful  ;  and,  lastly,  that  these  decrees  have  re- 
ceived a  binding  power  on  all  the  faithful  by  the  fact  of 
their  final  pubhcation  by  the  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church 
in  solemn  form  at  the  Public  Session. 

'•  While,  then,  we  ourselves  with  full  and  unhesitating 
faith  adhere  to  the  decrees  of  the  Comicil,  we  exhort  you 
as  your  divinel}'^  appointed  pastors  and  teachers,  and  be- 
seech you  in  love  to  your  souls,  to  give  no  car  to  uny 
teaching  contraiy  to  this,  whencesoever  it  may  come. 
Cling  all  the  more  unwaveringly,  in  union  so  with  your 
Bishops,  to  the  teaching  and  faith  of  the  Cathohc  Church  ; 
let  nothing  separate  you  from  the  Kock  on  which  Jesus 
Chiist  has  founded  His  Church,  with  the  j)romise  that  the 
'  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it.'  In  view  of  tlio 
excitement  which  exists  in  consequence  of  un-ecclesiastical 
manifestations  and  movements  against  the  decrees  of  the 
Council  in  several  places,  and  which  undoubtedly  forms  no 
small  trial  and  danger  to  many  souls,  as  well  as  considering 


APPENDIX. 


251 


the 
ab- 


the  tremendous  war  which  has  been  forced  upon  our  Ger- 
man Fatherland,  and  which  claims  at  the  same  time  our 
intense  interest  and  watchfulness,  and  which  has  already- 
plunged  innumerable  families  into  sorrow  and  mourning,  we 
cannot  forbear  from  earnestly  calling  all  the  faithful  to  fer- 
vent prayer  for  the  present  great  necessities  of  Church -and 
State.  Lift  up,  then,  your  hearts  in  faith  and  confidence 
to  onr  Father  in  Heaven,  Whose  wise  and  loving  Provi- 
dence guides  and  rules  everything,  and  whose  Divine  Son 
has  promised  most  sui'ely  to  hear  us  when  we  ask  in  His 
name. 

"  Pray,  also,  with  faith  and  trust  that  this  sanguiuaiy 
war,  by  a  complete  triumph  of  the  right  cause,  and  a  true 
and  lasting  peace,  may  quickly  end.  Pray  for  the  wants 
of  Holy  Chui'ch,  especially  for  ail  who  err  or  hesitate  in 
their  faith,  that  they  may  have  the  grace  of  a  firm,  decided, 
and  living  faith.  Pray  for  the  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church,  the  holy  Father,  who  most  hkely  at  this  very  mo- 
ment is  more  than  ever  before  in  distress  and  embari'ass- 
ineut.  Pray  with  confidence  in  the  merits  and  infinite  love 
of  the  Divine  heart  of  Jesus  Christ,  invoking  the  powerful 
intercession  of  the  Immaculate  Vu'gin  Mother  of  God. 

"  And  may  the  blessing  of  God  Ahnighty  descend  upon 
you  and  remain  with  you  all,  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. — Amen. 

"  At  the  end  of  August,  1870. 

>J<  Gbegohy,  Archbishop  of  Munich. 

>J<  Paul,  Archbishop  of  Cologne. 

*i'  Peter  Joseph,  Bishop  of  Limbiu'g. 

>i<  CiiuisTorHKii  Flouentius,  Bishop  of  Fulda. 

»J«  WiLLiAai  Emjlvnuel,  Bishop  of  Mayence. 

>|<  Edward  James,  Bishop  of  llildesheim. 

>X<  Conrad,  Bishop  of  Po<lorhom, 

>J<  John,  Bishop  of  Kulm.. 

>i*  Ignatius,  Bishop  of  Katisbon. 


H 


252  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

^  Pancratius,  Bishop  of  Augsburg. 

>i<  Francis  Leopold,  Bishop  of  Eichstadt. 

>J<  ]Matthias,  Bishop  of  Treves. 

>i<  Philip,  Bishop  of  Ermland. 

>i«  LoTHAiB,  Bishop  of  Leuka  in  partibus,  Administra- 
tor of  the  Archbishopric  of  Friburg. 

>J<  Adolphus,   Bishop  of  AgathouopoUs  in  partihus, 
Chaplain-in  Chief  of  the  Forces. 

»J«  Bernard  Brinkmann,  Vicar-Capitular  and  Bishop 
Elect  of  Munster 
Conrad  Reitha,  Bishop  Elect  of.Speyer." 


THE   END. 


/ 


nistra- 
irtihus, 
3ishop 


